THE  SPANISH  ABANDONMENT 

AND  REOCCUPATION  OF 

EAST  TEXAS, 

1773-1779 


BY 


HERBERT   E.  BOLTON,  Ph.  D. 

Adjunct  Professor  of  History,  the  University  of  Texts 


Reprinted  from  the  Quarterly  of  the  Texas  State  Historical  Association , 

.  No.  2  (October,  1905). 


AUSTIN,  TEXAS. 


Reprinted  from  the  Quarterly  of  the  Texas  State  Historical  Association, 
Vol.  IX.  No.  2  (October,  1905). 


THE  SPANISH  ABANDONMENT   AND  RE-OCCUPATION 
OF  EAST  TEXAS,  1773-1779.1 

I!  i:iir.i:i; T    i:.    BOLTON. 

In  K7\?  tin-  Spanish  government  decided  to  give  back  to  nature 
and  the  Indians,  temporarily  at  least,  all  that  part  of  Texas  north- 
east of  San  Antonio  de  B.'-xar  and  IV-ihia  del  Ksjiirilu  Santo,  some 
parts  of  which  Spain  had  occupied,  continuously  even  if  weakly, 
for  more  than  half  a  century.  That  this  plan  failed  was  due  pri- 
marily to  the  attachment  of  some  of  the  settlers  of  the  district 
to  their  homos ;  to  tin-  desire  of  the  provincial  authorities  to  main- 

!Bmi.i(><n<.\i'iiu  \i  \. .IK.—  This  paper,  with  the  exception  of  the  first  two 
subdivisions  of  section  I.  which  arc  based  mainly  on  secondary  authori- 
ties, has  been  prepared  almost  entirely  from  manuscript  materials  hith- 
erto unused,  found  in  the  Archive  Ceneral  y  Publico  .>f  Mexico  and  in 
the  BSxar  Archives  in  the  possession  of  the  University  of  Texas.  The 
principal  documents  used  are  the  following: 

1.  Expediente  sobre  proposiciones  del  Governador  de  Texas  Baron  de 
Ripperda,  para  ereccion  de  un  Nuevo  Precidio,  y  Emprender  una  cruda 
Guerra  contra  los  Apaches  Lipanes,  hacienda  Alianza  con  las  Naciones 
del  Nortte.  MS.  Folios  107.  The  papers  included  cover  the  years  1771- 
1773. 

•2.  Autos  que  se  ban  introducido  por  los  Vecinos  del  Presidio  de  los 
Adaes,  Sobre  que  les  deje  avecindar  en  el  de  la  Mision  de  los  Ais,  y 
establecimto.  del  Pueblo  de  Xuestra  Senora  del  Pilar  de  Bucareli.  MS. 
Folios  22.  The  papers  fall  within  the  years  1773-1774. 

3.  Quaderno  que  Corresponde  para  el  completto  del  Expediente  se- 
fialado  con  el  Numo.  1  [number  2  above]  remetido  con  fehca  31  del 


68  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

tain  an  influence  over  the  Indian  tribes  of  East  Texas,  as  a  make- 
weight against  the  hostile  Apache  and  Comanche  Indians  and 
against  Spain's  new  neighbors,  the  English;  and  to  the  temporiz- 
ing and  double  policy  of  the  viceroy.  The  story  of  the  re- 
moval of  the  Spanish  settlers  from  the  eastern  frontier  in  pur- 
suance of  this  plan  and  of  their  early  return  and  its  sanction  by 
the  local  government,  regardless  of  the  royal  policy,  is  not  without 
human  interest  nor  without  importance  in  the  history  of  the  Span- 
ish occupation  of  the  Southwest. 

I.      CONDITIONS  LEADING  TO  A  NEW   FRONTIER  POLICY. 

In  order  to  understand  why  Spain  thus  voluntarily  resolved  to 
relinquish  her  hold  upon  so  vast  and  so  rich  a  stretch  of  country, 
it  is  necessary  to  examine  briefly  conditions  existing  at  the  time 

proximo  pasado  Marzo  del  corriente  afio.  MS.  Folios  53.  The  papers 
fall  within  the  years  1773-1774. 

4.  Expediente  Sobre  que  el  Vecindario  del  Pueblo  de  Ntra.  Sefiora  del 
Pilar  de  Bucareli  se  le  destine  Parroco,  por  cuenta  de  la  Real  Hacienda. 
MS.  Folios  21.     The  papers  are  dated  1775-1779. 

5.  Los    Vecinos    del    extinguido    Presidio,    y    Pobla^ion    de    los    Adais, 
hasta   el   Numero   de   Sesenta   y   tres,  que   sin   estableoimiento   alguno  se 
hayan  agregados  al  de  San  Antonio  de  Bexar,  y  Villa  de  San  Fernando; 
Sobre  que  atendiendo  al   infeliz .  estado,  en  que  han  quedado,   por  haber 
abandonado  sus  Casas  y  Tierras;   y  ft   fidelidad,  con  que  han  servido,  y 
estan,  prontas,  a  continuar  sirviendo  a  S.  M.  en  aquella  Fronttera,  se  les 
conceda   por   el   Sefior   Governador   en   Gefe,   Comandante  General   alguno 
establecimiento  para  que  puedan  Subsistir  con  sus  Familias.     MS.  Folios 
32.     The  papers  fall  within  the  period  1778-1779. 

6.  Represertacion  del  Justicia  de  la  Poblacion  de  Nuestra  Senora  del 
Pilar   de  Bucareli;    Sobre  livertad   de  Diezmos   para  aquellos  Moradores. 
MS.   Folios   10.     The  correspondence  falls  within  the  period   1777-1778. 

7.  Expediente    sobre   el   abandono  del    Pueblo  de   Nuestra   SeSora   del 
Pilar  de  Bucareli:    Quaderno  5°.     MS.   Folios  53.     Period  covered,   1778- 
1780. 

8.  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono  del  Pueblo  de  Bucarely,  y  establecer 
Comercio  con  los  Yndios  Gentiles  del  Nortte.     Quaderno  6°.     MS.  Folios 
46.     Period    covered,    1780-1782.     Number    7    is    cited    in    this    article    as 
"Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,''  and  number  8  as  "Expediente  sobre  el 
abandono     .     .     .     y  establecer  Comercio." 

All  of  the  above  documents  are  collected  in  volume  LI  of  Secci6n  de 
Historia  of  the  Archivo  General.  The  original  papers  of  which  No.  1  is 
a  copy  are  in  volume  XX  of  the  Secci6n  de  Provincial  Internas.  Num- 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    69 

along  the  north  Mexican  border  as  a  whole,  and  more  particularly 
those  on  the  Texas-Louisiana  frontier. 

I.  Indian  troubles  in  the  frontier  provinces. — At  the  middle  of 
the  eighteenth  century  it  seemed  as  if  most  of  what  had  been  ac- 
complished   for    civilization    in    northern    Mexico    through    the 
bravery  and  religious  zeal  of  the  Spaniards  was  about  to  be  de- 
stroyed by  Indian  revolts  within  and  Indian  attacks  from  without. 
Nearly  all  along  the  northern  frontier  from  Sonora  to  Texas  the 
interior  tribes  were  becoming  less  docile  and  those  outside  more 
aggressive. 

In  Sonora  the  chief  trouble  was  from  within.  In  1751  the 
Pimas  living  near  the  head  of  the  Gulf  of  California  revolted 
under  their  native  leader,  Don  Luis,  destroyed  most  of  the  Span- 
ish missions,  pueblos,  and  ranches  in  and  near  the  valley  of  the 
Altar  Kiver,  and  drove  out  many  of  the  settlers.,  After  several 

bers   2  and  3,  as  contained  in  volume  LI,  were  copied  from  copies  con- 
tained in  volume  XCIII  of  Seccifin  de  Historia. 

9.  Consulta  del  Sor.  Comandante  Gral.  de  las  Provas.  de  Oriente  sob  re 
solicitud   que   han   hecho   los   Yndios   Horcoquisac,   Atacapaces,   Vidais,   y 
Cocos,   pidiendole   se   establesca   la   Mision   del   Orcoquisac:    sobre   que   se 
separe   del  empleo  de  Tente.  de  Governador  ft  Don  Antonio  Gil   Ybarbo, 
etc.     MS.,  1788.     In  Volume  XCIII,  Secci6n  de  Historia,  Archivo  General. 

10.  Expediente  sobre  la  dolosa  y  fingida  paz  de  las  Naciones  del  Norte;v 
y  comercio  ilicito  de  los  Franceses  de  la  Nueba  Orleans.     MS.  Folios  48. 
A  copy  is  contained  in  Volume  XCIII  of    Secci6n   de  Historia,  Archivo 
General. 

II.  Correspondence    of    Governors    Ripper dft    and    Cabello    concerning 
Texas,  in  volumes  XCIX  and  C  of  Secci6n  de  Provincias  Internas.     Orig- 
inal MS. 

12.  Derrotero,  Diario.  y  Calculacion  de  leguas,  que  en  descubrimiento 
por   derecho  desde  esta  Provincia  del  Nueva  Mexico  hasta  el   Fuerte  de 
Natchitoches   y   la  de   los   Texas,  de  orden   superior  voy   a   practicar   en 
compania  de  Dn.  Pedro  Vial,  comisionado  a  esta  proposito,  yo  el  abajo  y 
lo  ultimo  firmado,  Francisco  Xavier  Fragoso.     Villa  de  Santa  F6,  veinte  y 
quatro  de  Junio  de  mil  setecientos  ochenta  y  ocho.     Sighed  also  by  Pedro 
Vial.     Document    No.    17,    volume    XLIII,    SecciCn    de    Historia,    Archivo 
General.     MS. 

13.  Reglamento  6  instruccion  para  los  presidios  que  se  han  de  formar 
en  la  llnea  de  frontera  de  la  Nueva  Espana.    Resuelto  por  el  rey  en  c§dula 
de  10  de  setimebre  de  1772,,  in  Arrillaga,  Recopilacion  de  leyes,  Decretos, 
Bandos,  Reglamentos,  Circular es  y  Providencias  de  los  Supremos  Poderes 
de  los    Estados-Unidos  Mexicanos,  etc.      (Mexico,  1835)   Vol.  IX,  139-189. 
Printed  first  in  Madrid,  1772. 


70  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

months  of  fighting  and  diplomacy  quiet  was  restored,  but  the  In- 
dians continued  threatening,  and  a  blight  rested  upon  the  once 
flourishing  Spanish  establishments.  Further  south,  in  the  same 
province,  the  Seri  Indians  soon  afterwards  destroyed  the  new  mis- 
sion at  Guaymas,  and  for  several  years  held  the  place  against  the 
Spaniards.  Peace  made  with  the  tribe  only  by  extravagant  prom- 
ises was  soon  broken,  and  war  continued,  greatly  to  the  discour- 
agement of  colonization  and  missionary  work  in  the  region  south 
of  the  Altar.  Northeastern  Sonora  suffered  from  raids  by  Apaches 
from  the  Gila  country.  These  attacks,  if  not  so  continuous  as  the 
disturbances  caused  by  the  near-by  Pimas  and  Seris,  were  even 
more  disastrous  because  of  the  great  numbers  of  the  invaders. 

In  what  is  now  Chihuahua — then  northern  Nueva  Viscaya — the 
devastation  was  perhaps  somewhat  less  than  in  Sonora,  but,  never- 
theless, there  was  general  complaint  there  that  the  Spanish  estab- 
lishments were  constantly  exposed  to  destruction  by  the  Apaches 
and  renegade  mission  Indians,  while  the  unconquered  savages  of 
Bolson  de  Mapimi  infested  the  line  of  travel  northward  to  Parral. 

In  New  Mexico  the  Yutes,  Apaches,  and  Comanches,  all  or  sev- 
erally, gave  trouble  nearly  every  year.  In  1746  the  last-named 
tribe  had  made  an  unusually  violent  attack  upon  Pecos,  Galisteo, 
and  other  places,  causing  considerable  loss  of  life  along  with  the 
destruction  of  property.  This  outrage  was  followed  in  succeeding 
years  by  wars  of  vengeance  that  greatly  disturbed  the  peace  and 
the  prosperity  of  the  community. 

In  spite  of  the  exceptional  prosperity  of  Nuevo  Santander  at  this 
time,1  it  and  Coahuila,  like  Chihuahua  and  Texas,  suffered  from 
both  apostate  mission  Indians  and  invading  Apaches.  The  dan- 
ger from  the  Apaches  seems  everywhere  to  have  been  less  to  human 
life  than  to  property.  The  chief  resources  of  the  northern  Span- 

JIt  was  between  1748  and  1751  that  the  province  of  Nuevo  Santander, 
which  lay  south  of  Ooahuila  and  Texas,  was  so  successfully  conquered 
and  colonized  by  Jose"  de  Escand6n.  Notwithstanding  the  general  pros- 
perity of  the  province,  however,  which  was  quite  out  of  keeping  with  con- 
ditions in  the  northern  provinces  as  a  whole,  it  was  necessary  to  organize 
in  1757  a  general  campaign  against  troublesome  Indians.  By  means  of 
this  campaign  some  of  the  natives  were  reduced  to  mission  life,  and  some 
were  driven  into  Coahuila  or  across  the  Rio  Grande  (Prieto,  Historia, 
Geografia  Estadistica  del  Estado  de  Tamaulipas;  Bancroft,  Mexico.  Ill, 
342-346). 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    71 

ish  settlers  were  their  droves  and  herds  of  horses,  mules,  cattle, 
and  small  stock,  and  to  steal  these  was  the  main  object  of  the 
Apache  raids.  Treacherous  to  the  last  degree,  these  Indians 
would  enter  a  village  or  presidio  in  the  guise  of  friendship,  and 
upon  leaving  run  off  all  the  stock  of  the  place.  As  the  Apaches 
were  pushed  south  by  their  inveterate  enemies,  the  Comanches, 
such  thieveries,  not  always  unattended  by  murder,  occurred  with 
increasing  frequency,  to  the  utter  despair  of  many  of  the  frontier 
establishments. 

The  Texas  settlements,  particularly  San  Antonio  de  Bexar  and 
Bahia  del  Espiritu  Santo,  had  long  been  infested  by  the  thieving 
Apaches  and  Karankawas,  and  now  one  section  of  the  prov- 
ince was  beset  by  a  more  blood-thirsty  enemy,  the  Comanches. 
This  tribe  was  first  heard  of  in  Texas  in  1743.  They  did  no  seri- 
ous damage  until  1758,  but  in  March  of  that  year  they,  in  con- 
junction with  a  number  of  northeastern  tribes,  who  had  hitherto 
given  no  trouble,  attacked  and  burned  the  newly  founded  mission 
at  San  Saba,  on  the  San  Saba  River,  murdered  some  of  the  mis- 
sionaries and  soldiers,  set  fire  to  the  stockade  of  the  presidio  and 
drove  off  part  of  the  stock.  The  occasion  assigned  for  this  attack 
was  that  the  San  Saba  mission  was  designed  to  minister  to  the 
Apaches,  mortal  enemies  of  the  Comanches.  The  presidials  were 
terrified,  they  clamored  for  a  removal  to  another  site,  and  were  only 
with  difficulty  kept  from  deserting.  In  the  following  year  Colonel 
Parilla  went  out  with  five  hundred  men  to  punish  the  Indians,  but 
instead  he  suffered  an  ignominious  defeat.  In  the  country  of  the 
Taovayases  his  troops  were  attacked  by  a  large  body  of  the  allies, 
before  whom  they  fled,  leaving  behind  them  baggage  and  artillery.1 
This  victory  over  the  Spaniards,  which  for  more  than  a  decade  went 
unpunished,  served  to  lessen  the  prosperity  of  the  none  too  flourish- 
ing Texas  settlements.  The  Comanches  and  other  northern  tribes 
continued  to  trouble  the  presidio  of  San  Saba  and  even  sought  the 
Apaches  in  the  neighborhood  of  Bexar.2 

This  condition  of  affairs  called  forth  numerous  reports  from 

'See  on  page  108  a  reference  to  the  cannon  left  by  Parilla. 

2This  section  is  based  upon  Bancroft's  Mexico  (Vol.  Ill),  his  North  Mean- 
can  States  and  Texas  (Vol.  I),  and  his  Arizona  and  New  Mexico;  Prieto, 
Historia,  Geografia  y  Estadistica  del  Estado  de  Tamaulipas;  Bonilla, 
Breve  Co-mpendio;  the  royal  Reglamento  e  instrucion  of  1772  (see  biblio- 


72  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

officials  concerning  the  Indian  depredations,  and  numerous  ap- 
peals from  the  settlers  for  protection.  These  reports  and  appeals 
came  to  the  notice  of  the  king  and  he,  in  1753,  enjoined  the 
viceroy  to  take  the  matter  in  hand.  Nothing  being  done,  in  1756 
the  king  commissioned  the  Marques  de  Rubi,  a  Spanish  field-mar- 
shal, to  inspect  and  make  a  report  upon  all  the  defences  of  the 
interior  provinces.  The  usual  delay  ensued,  and  it  was  ten  years 
before  Rubi  actually  began  his  tour  of  inspection.  But  finally,  in 
March,  1766,  he  left  Mexico  City,  accompanied  by  his  engineer, 
Nicolas  de  la  Fora,  and  passed  through  one  province  after  another, 
arriving  in  Texas  in  August,  1767.1  The  results  of  this  visit  are 
told  further  on. 

2.  The  cession  of  Louisiana  to  Spain,  1762. — At  the  same  time 
that  a  demand  was  growing  for  stronger  defences  along  the  fron- 
tier as  a  whole,  there  came  a  change  that  temporarily  lessened  the 
strain  on  the  northeastern  Texas  border.  This  change  was  the 
cession  of  Louisiana  by  France  to  Spain  in  1762,  at  the  close  of 
the  long  struggle  in  America  known  as  the  French  and  Indian 
War. 

The  proximity  of  the  French  had  from  the  first  been  the  char- 
acteristic motive  for  maintaining  Spanish  settlements  in  East 
Texas.  News  of  La  Salle's  fortification  on  Matagorda  Bay  was 
what  led  Spain,  after  more  than  a  century  and  a  half  s  inactivity, 
to  found  in  1690  the  first  mission  in  Texas.  Mission  San  Fran- 
cisco de  los  Texas,  as  the  establishment  was  called,  was  placed 
far  to  the  east,  near  the  Neches  River.  This  mission  and  another 
that  was  founded  soon  after,  being  abandoned,  it  required  new 
French  encroachments,  in  the  form  of  San  Denis's  trading  ex- 
pedition across  Texas  (1714-1715)  to  bring  the  Spanish  back  to 
the  frontier.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  designs  of  San  Denis 
or  of  the  government  behind  him,  the  Spanish  authorities  feared 
danger,  and  proceeded  again  to  secure  a  foot-hold  in  the  country 
threatened.  An  expedition  sent  out  in  1715  re-established  the 

graphical  notes,  page  69)  ;  and  a  report  made  in  1784  by  Domingo  Cabello, 
governor  of  Texas,  on  the  Indian  affairs  of  Coahuila  and  Texas. 

^Bonilla,  Breve  Compendia  (Translation  by  Elizabeth  Howard  West  in 
THE  QUARTERLY,  VIII,  59.  All  of  my  citations  of  the  Breve  Compendia 
are  to  this  translation)  ;  Cavo,  Los  Tres  Siglos  de  Mexico  (Mexico,  1835- 
1838),  II,  184. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    73 

Texas  mission,  founded  five  new  ones  in  the  vicinity,  and  placed 
a  garrison  at  Presidio  de  los  Texas,  or  Dolores.  All  of  these  new 
missions  were  nearer  the  French  frontier  than  San  Francisco,  the 
first  one,  while  one  of  them,  San  Miguel  de  Linares,  was  beyond 
the  Sabine  Eiver,  squarely  in  front  of  the  French  post  at  Natchi- 
toches. 

The  frontier  military  policy  thus  begun  by  establishing  Presidio 
de  los  Texas,  was  developed  by  war  between  France  and  Spain. 
A  French  attack  on  Pensacola  in  1719  was  followed  by  the  flight 
of  the  frightened  Spanish  garrison  and  missionaries  from  the 
frontier  to  Bexar.  As  soon  as  possible  the  Marques  de  San  Miguel 
de  Aguayo  was  sent  (1721)  to  recover  the  province  and  to 
strengthen  its  defences.  He  re-established  the  abandoned  mis- 
sions and  Presidio  de  los  Texas,  built  a  new  presidio  called  Pilar 
de  los  Adaes  near  Mission  San  Miguel,  and  garrisoned  it  with  a 
hundred  soldiers. 

While  the  defences  of  the  northeast  had  thus  been  first  pro- 
vided and  later  strengthened  to  guard  against  the  danger  of  French 
encroachment,  one  of  the  principal  reasons  for  weakening  them 
again  was  an  official  opinion  that  this  fear  was  unfounded.  In 
1727-28  General  Pedro  de  Rivera  inspected  all  of  the  Texas  pre- 
sidios; and,  at  the  request  of  the  viceroy,  reported  the  changes  that 
he  thought  should  be  made  in  them.  Among  these  recommenda- 
tions one  was  that,  since  the  Indians  of  the  northeast  were  peace- 
ful, Presidio  de  Ids  T6xas  was  unnecessary  and  should  be  aban- 
doned; and  another  was  that,  since  the  danger  from  the  French 
garrison  at  Natchitoches  was  very  slight,  the  Spanish  guard  at 
Adaes  was  unnecessarily  large,  and  should  be  reduced  from  one 
hundred  to  sixty  soldiers.  These  recommendations  were  carried 
out  a  year  later.  One  result  of  this  change  was  that  the  Quere- 
taran  friars,  whose  missions  depended  on  Presidio  de  los  T6xas, 
moved  their  missions  to  San  Antonio  de  Bexar  (1731).  This 
left  on  the  frontier  the  presidio  of  Pilar  de  los  Adaes  and  the  mis- 
sions at  Adaes,  Los  Ais,  and  Nacogdoches. 

For  a  score  or  more  of  years  no  important  change  was  made  in 
East  Texas,  but  the  chief  matters  of  interest  there  were  a  dispute 
over  the  boundary  between  Spanish  and  French  territory  and 
complaints  about  French  smuggling  on  the  border.  The  increase 
of  this  species  of  trade  along  the  Trinity  led  to  the  establishment 


74  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

about  1755  of  a  new  presidio  on  that  river,  which,  after  two  re- 
movals was  located  at  Orcoquisac,  the  site  of  the  mission  of  Nues- 
tra  Sefiora  de  la  Luz,  near  the  present  town  of  Liberty.1 
>/  It  is  thus  seen  that  fear  of  the  French,  in  one  form  or  an- 
other, had  from  the  very  beginning  been  a  decisive  factor  in  the 
Spanish  policy  on  the  Texas-Louisiana  frontier.  But  in  1762 
came  the  cession  of  Louisiana  to  Spain,  and  it  was  felt  that  danger 
from  the  French  was  largely  removed.  This  transfer  gave  Spain 
England  instead  of  France  for  a  neighbor,  and,  as  the  English 
settlements  were  as  yet  far  distant,  they  were  less  feared  for  the 
present  than  had  been  the  French  settlements  of  Louisiana  while 
subject  to  a  foreign  power.  This  alteration  of  French  relations 
just  at  the  time  of  especial  stress  all  along  the  rest  of  the  frontier 
of  New  Spain  helpr  to  explain  the  radical  change  that  was  now 
made  in  the  Spanish  policy  in  East  Texas. 

3.  Rubi's  inspection  and  recommendations. — JWhat  the  Marqu6s 
de  Eubi  saw  when  at  last  he  made  his  inspection  was  recorded  in 
the  diary  kept  and  the  map  made  by  Nicolas  de  la  Fora  and  in 
the  dictamen,  pr  opinion,  which  Eubi  himself  sent  later  to  the 
government.2  With  respect  to  the  frontier  in  general,  Rubi  re- 
ported in  detail  the  bad  condition  of  affairs  which  has  been  briefly 

*See  Garrison,  Texas,  'chs.  Ill,  IV,  V,  VIII ;  Bonilla,  Breve  Compendia, 
in  THE  QUARTERLY,  VIII,  12-59;  R.  C.  Clark,  "The  Beginnings  of  Texas," 
Ibid.,  V,  and  his  "Luis  Juchereau  de  San  Denis  and  the  Re-establishment 
of  the  T6jas  Missions,"  Ibid.,  VI,  1-26;  Mattie  Alice  Austin,  "The 
Municipal  Government  of  San  Fernando  de  Bejar,"  Ibid.,  VIII.  My  opin- 
ion as  to  the  location  of  Orcoquisac  is  based  on  the  La  Fora  map  (see 
next  note)  and  a  map  drawn  by  Gil  Ybarbo  in  1777  (see  page  118). 

'The  diary  kept  by  la  Flora  was  entitled  Viage  del  ingeniero  a  Sta  F£ 
(1766,  MS.,  in  what  Bancroft  calls  the  Pinart  Collection.  See  Bancroft, 
Arizona  and  New  Mexico,  258,  note.)  I  have  not  had  access  to  this  diary. 
A  copy  of  the  map,  if  not  the  original,  was  once  in  volume  V  of  Secci6n 
de  Historia,  Archive  General.  I  find  a  statement  to  this  effect  in  some 
notes  made  by  Father  Talamantes,  and  the  evidence  of  its  having  been 
torn  out  is  still  visible  in  the  volume.  Bancroft  knew  of  the  existence  of 
this  map,  but  was  unable  to  find  it  (see  his  Arizona  and  New  Mexico,  258, 
note).  I  fortunately  found  a  photograph  of  it  in  the  possession  of  the 
noted  scholar,  Mrs.  Zelia  Nuttall,  of  Coyuacan,  Mexico,  who  generously 
allowed  me  to  copy  it.  The  tradition  is,  I  believe,  that  the  map  was 
taken  from  its  place  -by  some  one  connected  with  Maximilian's  govern- 
ment. A  copy  of  the  part  of  the  Dictamen  bearing  on  Texas  is  contained 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.     75 

indicated  hereinbefore.1  What  he  found  in  Texas,  which  is  our 
chief  conpern  here,  was,  when  viewed  as  the  results  of  three- 
quarters  of  a  century's  occupation,  discouraging  enough.  Beyond 
San  Antonio  de  Bexar  toward  the  northeast  the  nearest  Spanish 
establishment  was  the  mission  at  Nacogdoches,  across  the  Neches2 
River,  administered  by  one  missionary,  but  without  a  resident 
Indian,  either  converted  or  under  instruction.  A  few  leagues 
further  on  was  the  mission  at  Los  Ais,  with  a  few  ranches  round 
about.  Here  lived  two  missionaries  in  the  same  inactivity  as  those 
at  Nacogdoches,  without  a  single  Indian  upon  whom  to  "exercise 
their  calling."3 

On  the  Louisiana  frontier,  seven  leagues  from  Natchitoches, 
were  the  mission  and  presidio  of  Adaes.  At  this  mission,  like 
the  others  without  neophytes,  were  two  missionaries.  The  presidio 
was  garrisoned  by  sixty  soldiers,  who,  with  the  Indians  in.  the 
neighborhood  peaceful  and  Louisiana  a  Spanish  province,  had 
nothing  to  do.  Round  about  the  presidio  in  a  village  and  on  ranches 
was  a  declining  population  of  some  thirty  families.  Toward  the 
south,  on  the  eastern  bank  of  the  Trinity,  "amid  a  thousand  mis- 
fortunes and  inconveniences,"  was  the  presidio  of  Orcoquisac,  with 
a  company  of  thirty-one  soldiers  and  an  imaginary  mission  with 
two  padres.  Though  an  attempt  had  been  made  to  establish  a 
colony  there,  the  place  had  no  citizen  population.  Finally,  north 
of  Bexar,  at  San  Saba,  now  outside  the  limits  of  Texas,  was  a  small 
garrison  of  soldiers,  at  the  mercy  of  the  Comanches  and  their 
allies,  as  had  recently  been  proved. 

Here,  then,  said  Rubi,  was  a  stretch  of  country  beyond. Bexar 
several  hundred  miles  wide  over  which  Spain  claimed  dominion, 

in  "Quaderno  que  Corresponde,"  Vol.  51,  Secci6n  de  Historia,  Archive 
General  (see  bibliographical  note,  page  67).  This  is  the  only  part  of  it 
that  I  have  seen  or  have  been  able  to  locate. 

Bancroft,  North  Mexican  States  and  Texas,  I,  585,  629-630. 

*It  may  be  a  matter  of  interest  to  know  that  the  favorite  and  almost 
invariable  form  of  spelling  the  name  of  this  river  in  the  documents  on 
which  this  study  is  based  is  Nechcts. 

•Reference  to  page  —  will  show  that  a  few  baptisms  were  made  at  these 
missions  as  late  as  the  time  when  Rubl  made  his  inspection. 


76  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

but  which  was  crossed  by  only  two  rude  paths,  and  occupied  by 
only  three  small  garrisons,  a  handful  of  impoverished  settlers,  and 
four  useless  missions.1 

As  a  general  result  of  his  inspection,  which  revealed  to  him 
some  establishments  stagnant  and  useless  and  others  without  de- 
fence, Rubi  concluded — what  ought  to  have  been  seen  long  before 
—that  Spain  was  trying  to  spread  over  too  much  ground,  and  that 
a  wise  policy  for  her  to  pursue  would  be  to  distinguish  between 
her  true  and  her  "imaginary"  dominions,  and  to  sacrifice  the  lat- 
ter to  the  former.2 

Consistently  with  this  conclusion,  he  made  some  far-reaching 
recommendations.  The  central  one  was  to  rearrange  the  frontier 
presidios  in  such  a  way  as  to  form  a  cordon  of  fifteen  strongholds 
placed  at  regular  intervals  between  Bahia  del  Espiritu  Santo,  in 
Texas,  and  the  head  of  the  Gulf  of  California,  with  San  Antonio 
de  Bexar  and  Santa  Fe  as  outposts.  This  line  he  considered  the 
true  frontier  of  New  Spain,  upon  the  defence  of  which  all  efforts 
should  be  concentrated.8 

This  central  recommendation  involved  radical  changes  in  Texas. 
Those  parts  of  the  province  that  lay  beyond  San  Antonio  de  Bexar 
he  regarded  as  only  "imaginary  possessions,"  and  he  believed 
that,  considering  the  pressing  need  elsewhere,  they  should  be  aban- 
doned. San  Saba,  he  said  was  at  the  mercy  of  the  Comanches 
and  their  allies,  Orcoquisac  was  at  best  of  little  use,  and  Adaes 
was  bringing  to  a  close  a  career  that  had  been  unfortunate 
from  the  outset.  His  first  recommendation  immediately  affecting 
Texas  was,  therefore,  that  San  Saba  be  deserted ;  that  the  presidio 
and  mission  of  Orcoquisac  be  either  extinguished  or  removed  to  a 
place  somewhere  in  the  neighborhood  of  Bexar  and  Bahia  del 
Espiritu  Santo;  and  that  Adaes  either  be  annexed  to  the  govern- 
ment of  Louisiana,  or  that  it  be  extinguished  and  the  settlers 
there  brought  near  Bexar,  or  if  they  preferred,  allowed  to  settle 
somewhere  in  Louisiana.4 

'Rubf,  Dictamen,  section  25. 

*Tbid. 

•Bancroft,  North  Mexican  States  and  Texas,  I,  585;  Rubi,  Dictamen, 
section  17. 

4Dictamen,  sections  17,  20,  25.  The  proposals  are  not  given  in  the  or- 
der of  the  document,  but  rather  in  that  determined  by  the  view-point  of 
this  paper. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    77 

Rubf s  next  proposal  was  to  strengthen  the  defences  of  San 
Antonio  de  Bexar  and  increase  the  population  in  its  neighborhood. 
By  abandoning  the  northeastern  settlements,  Bexar  would  be 
left,  he  said,  the  frontier  establishment  of  all  the  internal 
provinces  —  distant,  indeed,  more  than  fifty  leagues  from  the 
nearest  of  the  presidios  in  the  proposed  cordon.  Being  thus 
isolated,  it  would  still  be  in  its  present  danger  from  the  Apache- 
Comanche  wars.  The  thieving  Lipan  Apaches1  living  between 
Bexar  and  the  Rio  Grande  would  not  only  continue  to  be 
unpleasant  neighbors  themselves,  but  they  would  still  attract  to 
the  settlements  their  enemies,  the  Comanches  and  their  allies. 
Moreover,  if  the  Comanches;  now  dangerous  only  to  San  Saba, 
as  the  friend  of  the  Apaches,  should  ever  invade  the  interior,  a 
circumstance  not  to  be  expected,2  Bexar  would  become  the  chief 
object  of  their  attacks.  These  considerations  led  him  even 
to  suggest  withdrawing  the  villa  of  San  Fernando  and  the  costly 
and  imposing  but  decadent  missions  at  Bexar  to  the  Rio  Grande, 
in  the  shelter  of  the  projected  line  of  presidios.  Refraining,  how- 
ever, from  so  radical  a  proposal,  he  advised  that  a  fortification 
should  be  built  to  protect  the  citizens  of  the  villa  of  San  Fernando, 
adjacent  to  the  presidio  of  Bexar,  and  that  the  garrison  of  the 
presidio  should  be  increased  from  twenty-three  to  eighty  men  by 
bringing  to  Bexar  the  soldiers  from  San  Saba,  Adaes,  and  Orco- 
quisac,  unless  the  last  should  be  needed  at  Bahia  del  Espiritu  Santo. 
The  governor,  residing  at  Bexar,  should,  he  thought,  be  made  com- 
mander of  the  presidio  of  San  Juan  Bautista,  on  the  Rio  Grande, 
which  might  be  moved  nearer  Bexar  if  circumstances  de- 
manded it.  Since  fear  of  Indians  had  been  the  chief  obstacle 
to  the  growth  of  population,  he  predicted  that  such  a  strengthen- 
ing of  the  defence  of  Bexar  would  make  it  possible  to  colonize 
in  its  vicinity  on  a  considerable  scale.8 

With  regard  to  the  Apaches,  who  were,  as  we  have  seen,  troubling 

xThe  branch  of  the  Apaches  who  were  infesting  Texas  were  the  Lipans, 
commonly  called  the  Lipan  Apaches. 

2Rubi  reflected  the  fears  of  some  when  he  said  that  he  could  not  sub- 
scribe to  the  opinion  that  the  Indians  might  be  incited  by  the  European 
neighbors  of  Spain  toward  the  northeast  to  invade  the  interior  Spanish 
provinces  (Dictamen,  section  17). 

•Dictamen,  section  17. 


78  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

the  frontier  from  Chihuahua  to  Texas,  and  the  settlements  of 
Coahuila  and  Texas  in  particular,  Rubi  declared  mercy  to  be  ill- 
timed,  and  maintained  that  since  the  Comanches  came  to  the  set- 
tlements only  in  pursuit  of  the  Apaches,  danger  from  the  Co- 
manches and  their  allies  would  cease  as  soon  as  the  Apaches  should 
be  exterminated.  He  recommended,  therefore,  that  Apaches  should 
no  longer  be  admitted  to  the  shelter  of  the  missions  and  presidios, 
where  they  would  only  prove  their  treachery,  but  that  a  vigorous 
war  should  be  waged  against  them,  and  that,  when  conquered, 
the  tribe  should  be  dissolved  and  the  captives  taken  to  the  interior 
of  Mexico.1 

Turning  his  attention  to  the  Gulf  coast  policy,  he  said,  contrary 
to  the  opinions  of  some,  that  it  was  impossible,  even  if  necessary,  to 
occupy  the  Texas  part  of  that  coast  by  land  because  of  its  inac- 
cessibility from  the  Gulf  and  of  its  bad  climatic  conditions.  He  ad- 
vised, therefore,  that  the  presidio  of  Bahia  del  Espiritu  Santo 
should  remain  where  it  was,  on  the  San  Antonio  River,  for  these 
reasons  as  well  as  to  protect  the  well-stocked  ranches  already  es- 
tablished there  and  the  people  whom  it  was  proposed  to  remove 
thither  from  the  eastern  frontier.2 

Rubi  realized  that  there  would  be  no  lack  of  persons  to  call  him 
unpatriotic  in  suggesting  so  enormous  a  diminution  of  the  kings 
dominion;  but  he  reminded  such  that  the  Spanish  hold  upon  East 
Texas  was  so  slight  as  to  be  only  nominal;  that  relinquishing  this 
.shadowy  grasp  would  be  off -set  by  a  saving  of  forty-four  thousand 
pesos  a  year;  and  that  the  spiritual  and  the  political  losses  would 
be  slight.  On  these  points  he  said:  <rWith  respect  to  the  conver- 
sion of  the  unfaithful,  not  a  Christian  or  a  neophyte,  .  .  . 
will  be  lost  on  the  day  when  the  four  missions  are  suppressed; 
and  with  respect  to  the  protection  of  our  real  dominions,  by  re- 
tiring this  figurative  frontier  of  two  hundred  leagues  and  more, 
we  shall  substitute  for  this  weak  barrier  one  that  is  being  more 
respectably  constituted  on  the  Colorado  [Red]  and  Missouri  Rivers, 
since  the  present  governor  of  that  colony  [Louisiana] 

'Dictamen,  section  26;  Bonilla,  Breve  Compendia,  61;  Garrison,  Texas, 
91.  A  few  years  after  this  time,  Governor  RipperdS.  recommended  using 
the  northern  nations  as  allies  in  the  war  against  the  Apaches  (Bonilla, 
Breve  Compendia,  66).  See  also,  post,  p.  92. 

!Dictamen,  section  19. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texan.    79 

much  more  according  to  the  intentions  of  the  king,  impedes  com- 
munication and  traffic  between  it  and  the  dominions  of  this 
realm."1 

We  should  not,  of  course,  regard  these  proposals  of  the  Marques 
de  Rubi  as  a  recommendation  that  Spain  should  relinquish  her 
title  to  the  territory  in  question,  or  that  she  should  never  under- 
take to  occupy  it,  for  they  were  conditioned  by  the  fact  that  beyond 
Texas  lay  another  possession  nominally  Spanish,  which,  in  a  sense, 
made  Texas  an  interior  province.  But  they  did  mean  that  Rubi 
considered  that  for  a  long  time  to  come,  at  least,  it  would  be  useless 
for  Spain  to  try  to  colonize  or  to  exercise  any  real  control  in  the 
country  between  Louisiana  and  San  Antonio  de  Bexar;  and  the 
adoption  of  these  recommendations  by  the  king  was,  on  the  part  of 
the  central  government,  a  confession  of  the  same  sort. 

II.      THE  NEW   FRONTIER  POLICY,   1772. 

1.  The  royal  order  of  1772. — Rubi's  report  passed  to  the  hands 
of  the  king,  and,  after  the  usual  deliberate  course  of  Spanish  leg- 
islation, the  monarch  issued,  on  September  10,  1772,  an  order 
popularly  known  as  the  "New  Regulation  of  Presidios."2  This 
was  practically  an  adoption  of  Rubi's  proposals,  with  the  supple- 
mentary legislation  requisite  to  carry  them  into  effect.3 

We  have  seen  that  the  central  point  of  Rubi's  plan  was  to  con- 

^ictamen,  section  25. 

2Reglamento  e"  instruccion  para  los  presidios  que  han  de  formar  en 
la  linea  de  frontera  de  la  Nueva  Espafia.  Resuelto  por  el  Hey  en  cfidula 
de  10  de  Setiembre  de  1772.  First  printed  in  Madrid,  1772.  The  copy  of 
the  document  which  I  have  used  is  in  Arrillaga,  Recopilacion  de  Leyes, 
decretos,  Bandos,  Keglamcntos,  Circulares  y  Providencias  de  los  Supremos 
Poderes  de  los  Estados-Unidos  Mexicanos,  etc.  (Mexico,  1835),  IX,  ISO- 
ISO.  I  have  unfortunately  been  unable  thus  far  to  find  any  records  re- 
vealing the  inner  process  by  which  this  legislation  was  brought  about. 

S0n  the  changes  made  on  the  northern  frontier  in  consequence  of  this 
royal  order,  see,  besides,  the  authorities  already  cited,  Revillagigedo's 
Ta^orme  de  Abril,  1793  (in  Oavo,  Tres  Siglos,  III,  112),  and  his  Carta 
de  27  de  Diciembre,  in  Dicoionario  Universal  de  Historia  y  de  Geografia, 
V,  426  (Mexico,  1853-1856,  4to  10  Vols.,  and  Madrid,  1846-1850,  4to  8 
Vols.)  ;  Velasco,  Sonora,  Its  Extent,  etc.  (San  Francisco,  1861)  ;  Escudero, 
Noticias  Estadisticas  de  Sonora  y  Sinaloa  (Mexico,  1849). 


80  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

centrate  effort  upon  the  defence  of  what  he  considered  the  real 
possessions  of  New  Spain.  To  do  this  it  was  necessary  to  place  the 
fortifications  in  such  relations  that  one  could  support  another,  and 
near  enough  together  to  prevent  hostile  Indians  breaking  through 
the  intervening  spaces.  Accordingly,  the  royal  order  provided  that 
the  fifteen  frontier  presidios  should  be  placed  forty  leagues  apart 
in  an  irregular  line  extending  from  Altar,  near  the  head  of  the 
Gulf  of  California,  as  the  westernmost,  to  Bahia  del  Espiritu 
Santo,  on  the  San  Antonio  Eiver  in  Texas,  as  the  easternmost. 
The  intermediate  presidios  of  the  line,  named  in  order  from  west 
to  east,  were  to  be  Tubac,  Terrenate,  Fronteras,  Janos,  San  Buena- 
ventura, Paso  del  Norte,  Guajoquilla^  Julimes,  Cerrogordo,  San 
Saba,  Monclova,  and  San  Juan  Bautista.  Of  these  only  three, 
Janos,  San  Juan  Bautista,  and  Bahia  del  Espiritu  Santo,  were  to 
remain  unmoved.1 

From  the  outposts,  Santa  Fe  and  San  Antonio  de  Bexar,  re- 
spectively, Kobledo,  twenty  leagues  above  El  Paso,  and  Arroyo  del 
Cibolo,  between  San  Antonio  de  Bexar  and  Bahia  del  Espiritu 
Santo,  were  to  be  garrisoned.2 

The  force  at  San  Antonio  de  Bexar  was  to  be  increased  to  the 
size  recommended  by  Kubi,  by  bringing  the  requisite  number  of 
soldiers  from  Adaes  and  Orcoquisac;  Santa  Fe  was  likewise 
to  have  eighty  soldiers,  Bahia  del  Espiritu  Santo  fifty-one, 
and  the  rest  of  the  presidios  of  the  line  forty-six  each.3  The  pre- 
sidio of  San  Saba,  instead  of  being  extinguished,  as  Rubi  had  sug- 
gested, was  to  be  removed  to  the  banks  of  the  Rio  Grande, 
while  those  of  Adaes  and  Orcoquisac,  with  their  missions,  were  to 
be  suppressed.  The  familiesvat  Adaes  and  Los  Ais  were  to  be 
brought  to  the  vicinity  of  Bexar  and  given  lands. 

'The  map  made  by  de  la  Fora  (see  page  74)  was  the  one  by  which  the 
king's  advisers  were  guided  in  drawing  up  the  "New  Regulation"  (Arril- 
laga,  Recopilacion,  IX,  172).  For  the  location  of  most  of  these  pre- 
sidios before  they  were  changed,  see  maps  in  Bancroft,  North  Mexican 
States  and  Texas,  I,  251,  310,  377,  381. 

2Reglamento  e  instruccion,  title  "Instruccion  para  la  nueva  colocacion 
de  presidios,"  Sec.  1. 

8At  each  of  the  other  presidios  there  were  to  be  kept  ten  Indian  ex- 
plorers, but  as  it  was  thought  that  there  were  no  Indians  near  Bahia  suit- 
able for  this  purpose,  that  place  was  to  have  five  additional  soldiers  ( Regla- 
mento  e  instruccion,  Titulo  Segundo,  in  Arrillaga,  Recopilacion,  IX,  142). 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.     81 

To  secure  a  more  uniform  and  efficient  military  service  on  the 
frontier,  the  order  provided  for  a  new  general  officer,  the  inspector 
comandante  of  the  interior  provinces  of  New  Spain.  He  must 
be  a  person  of  at  least  the  rank  of  colonel,  and  might  not, 
while  inspector,  be  a  provincial  governor  or  a  presidial  captain. 
He  was  put  directly  under  orders  from  the  viceroy,  but  in  case  a 
comandante  general  of  the  interior  provinces  should  ever  be  ap- 
pointed, he  was  to  be  directly  subject  to  that  officer.  To  aid  him 
in  the  discharge  of  his  duties  two  assistant  inspectors  were  pro- 
vided. These  duties  were  primarily  to  keep  the  viceroy  informed 
of  presidial  and  military  affairs,  direct  frontier  campaigns,  and 
supervise  the  presidios  and  presidial  officers.  Either  he  or  his  as- 
sistants must  make  an  annual  inspection  of  each  of  the  presidios 
and  report  to  the  viceroy.  x 

The  office  of  inspector  comnmlnnte  was  filled  by  the  appoint- 
ment of  Dn.  Hugo  Oconor,  who  had  recently  served  as  governor  of 
Texas  ad  interim.  Of  his  career  there  Bonilla,  author  of  the 
Breve  Compendia,  wrote,  "Oconor  attained  the  glorious  distinc- 
tion of  leaving  an  immortal  name  in  the  province.  He  attested 
his  valor,  disinterested  conduct,  and  military  policy,  he  preserved 
peace  \n  the  land,  and  he  made  himself  an  object  of  fear  to  the 
savages,  who  know  him  by  the  name  of  el  Capitan  Colorado  [the 
Red  Captain]."1  Oconor  chose  for  his  assistants  Antonio  Bonilla, 
just  quoted,  and  Dn.  Roque  Medina.2 

'2.  Oconor 's  instructions  to  Ripperdd. — The  viceroy's  instruc- 
tions to  Oconor  for  carrying  the  new  policy  into  effect  were  issued 
March  10,  1773,  and  on  May  6,  Oconor,  from  camp  at  Nuestra 
Senora  del  Carmen,  despatched  to  Baron  de  TJipperda,  then  gov- 
ernor of  Texas,  orders  for  putting  in  force  so  much  of  the  new 
plan  as  concerned  his  province.3  Immediately  upon  receiving  the 

lBreve  Compendia,  62. 

2The  Breve  Compendia  was  written  before  Bonilla  Became  Oconor's  as- 
sistant, 

3Ynstruccion  Reservada  que  ban  de  tener  presente  el  Colonel  de  Caval- 
lerla  Baron  de  Riperda  Governador  de  la  Prova.  de  texas  para  la  practica 
en  los  dos  Presidios  de  alia  del  nuebo  Reglamto.  qe.  su  Magd.  se  ha  servido 
expedir  en  Diez  de  Septre.  del  Ano  proximo  pasado,  y  demas  puntos  que 
contiene,  para  el  Govno.  Politica  de  dha.  Provincia  dispuesta  por  mi  Dn. 
Hugo  Oconor,  Coronel  de  Infanteria  Comandte.  Ynspector  de  las  Pro- 


82  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

orders  the  governor  was  to  go  to  the  frontier  and  extinguish  the 
two  presidios  and  the  four  missions1  condemned  by  Kubi,  taking 
in  charge  the  ornaments  that  had  been  given  to  the  mission 
churches  by  the  crown,2  and  removing  to  Bexar  the  garrisons, 
artillery,  and  munitions  from  the  presidios,  and  whatever  settlers 
might  be  found  at  any  of  the  four  places.  The  settlers  were  to  be 
brought  to  the  villa  of  San  Fernando,  given  lands  within  the  villa 
for  building  spots,  and  outside  the  villa  for  pasture  and  arable 
lands,  and  the  privilege  of  making  at  their  own  expense  an 
irrigating  ditch  from  the  San  Antonio  Kiver.3  On  returning  to 
Bexar,  he  was  to  reorganize  the  garrison,  choosing  for  the  pre- 
scribed eighty  men  the  best  in  all  three  of  the  companies  at  Adaes, 
Orcoquisac,  and  Bexar.  Ripperda  was  to  remain  captain,  Cordova 
and  Oranday,  lieutenants  of  the  garrisons  of  Orcoquisac  and 
Bexar,  were  to  be  lieutenants  of  the  reformed  company,  while  the 
aged  lieutenant  of  Adaes,  Jose  Gonzalez,  a  veteran  of  some  forty 
years'  service  at  the  same  place,  was  to  be  retired  with  other  super- 
annuated and  useless  soldiers.  The  company  at  Bexar  having 
been  reorganized,  a  detachment  of  twenty  men  was  to  be  sent  at 
once  to  Arroyo  del  Cibolo.4  The  purpose  of  garrisoning  this  place 
was  to  protect  a  number  of  ranches  in  the  neighborhood,  and  to 
cover  the  long  distance  between  Bexar  and  Bahia  del  Espiritu 
Santo.6 

III.      REMOVAL  OF  THE  SETTLERS  FROM  THE  EASTERN  FRONTIER, 

1773. 

1.  Ripperda  on  the  frontier. — These  instructions  reached  the 
hands  of  Ripperda  on  May  18.  He  apparently  did  not  favor  the 

vincias  de  este  Reyno  de  Nueva  Espafia  de  Orden  del  Exmo.  Sor.  Fr.  Dn. 
Antonio  Maria  Bucareli  y  Ursua,  Virrey  Governor,  y  Capitan  General  de 
ella  (in  Expediente  sobre  proposiciones,  79-90). 

xThe  official  names  of  these  missions  were  Nuestra  Sefiora  de  Guadalupe 
de  Nacogdoches,  Nuestra  Sefiora  del  Pilar  de  los  Adaes,  Nuestra  Sefiora 
de  los  Dolores  de  los  Ais,  and  Nuestra  Sefiora  de  la  Luz. 

2The  rest  of  the  movables  of  the  missions  were  to  go  to  the  College  of 
Zacatecas,  upon  which  the  missions  depended  (Ynstruccion  Reservada, 
Sec.  2). 

'Ynstruccion  Reservada,  Sees.  5-9. 

*Ibid,  Sees.  10-15. 

'See  note  on  Arroyo  del  Cfbolo,  page  87. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    83 

step  about  to  be  taken,  as  will  be  seen  later  on,  but  within  a  week, 
nevertheless,  he  set  out  for  the  frontier,  going  first  to  Adaes  and 
returning  by  way  of  Nacogdoches.1  It  seems  that,  the  garrison  of 
Orcoquisac  was  already  at  Bexar,  and  that,  therefore,  Ripperda 
did  not  go  to  Orcoquisac.2  As  affairs  at  Bexar  demanded  his  at- 
tention, he  remained  only  eight  days  in  the  settlements,  leaving 
the  execution  of  his  mission  to  Lieutenant  Gonzalez,  of  the  Adaes 
garrison. 

At  mission  Nacogdoches,  where  a  large  concourse  of  Indians 
was  assembled,  the  governor  was  visited  by  the  head  chief  of  the 
Texas,  Santo,  or  Vigotes,  who  had  suspended  hostilities  with  the 
Osages  in  order  to  entreat  the  Spaniards  not  to  leave  the  frontier. 
Vigotes  seem  to  have  been  moved  to  this  solicitude  in  part  by  the 
fact  that  the  Lipans  were  just  then  threatening  hostilities.3 
He  undoubtedly  knew,  too,  that  the  withdrawal  of  the  Spaniards 
meant  a  decrease  in  the  number  of  presents  and  in  the  available 
supply  of  firearms  and  other  articles  of  trade. 

Contrary  to  Rubf  s  prediction  that  Adaes  was  bringing  to  a  close 
its  unfortunate  career,  since  his  visit  six  years  before  the  place 
seems  to  have  prospered,  at  least  in  so  far  as  numbers  are  a  sign  of 
prosperity;  for  whereas  in  1767  Rubi  was  able  to  report  only  about 
thirty  families  —  perhaps  two  hundred  persons  —  Ripperda  esti- 
mated a  population  of  more  than  five  hundred,  living  near  the 
presidio  and  on  ranches  round  about  Adaes  and  Los  Ais.4  These 

'Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  May  28,  1773,  and  July  11,  1773,  in  Vol.  100, 
Pro  vine  ias  Internas,  Archivo  General. 

lOn  his  return  from  the  frontier  the  governor  mentioned  finding  Cap- 
tain Pacheeo,  of  the  Orcoquisac  garrison,  at  B£xar.  A  report  made  on 
Dec.  15,  1771,  shows  that  at  that  time  all  of  the  garrison  belonging  to 
Orcoquisac,  as  well  as  fifty  of  the  soldiers  from  Adaes,  were  in  Bgxar. 
Whether  the  Orcoquisac  garrison  had  remained  there  all  this  time  I  can 
not  say.  Ripperda  may  have  gone  to  Adaes  by  way  of  Orcoquisac,  which 
would  account  for  the  garrison  reaching  B£xar  in  advance  of  the  gov- 
ernor (Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  Dec.  15,  1771,  and  July  11,  1773,  in  Vol. 
TOO,  Provincias  Internas,  Archivo  General). 

/  'Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  July  11,  1773  (Letter  No.  30,  Vol.  100,  Pro- 
vincias Internas,  Archivo  General). 

'Ibid, 


84  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

figures  are  fairly  substantiated  by  other  evidence.1  The  popula- 
tion was  a  mixture  of  Spanish,  French,  and  Indians,  and,  perhaps, 
Negroes.  Much  of  the  recent  growth  seems  to  have  been  due  to 
an  influx,  after  Louisiana  became  a  Spanish  province,  of  French 
and  half-breeds  from  Natchitoches,  some  of  them  Indian  traders. 

2.  Antonio  Gil  Ybarbo. — The  most  prominent  citizen  of  the 
vicinity  was  Antonio  Gil  Ybarbo,  who  becomes  the  central  charac- 
ter of  the  remainder  of  this  sketch.  The  few  facts  that  we  can 
gather  of  his  previous  career  shed  light  upon  conditions  on  the 
eastern  frontier,  and,  viewed  in  connection  with  Ybarbo's  subse- 
quent influence,  upon  the  attitude  of  the  government  towards  these 
conditions.  Ybarbo  was  a  native  of  Adaes,  and  at  the  time  when 
this  story  opens  he  was  about  forty-four  years  old.2  By  his 
enemies  he  was  reputed  to  be  a  mulatto.3  Though  his  headquar- 
ters seem  to  have  been  at  Adaes,  he  was  the  owner  of  and  lived 
part  of  the  time  upon  a  large  ranch,  called  El  Lobanillo  (the  Mole 
or  Wart),  situated  near  the  mission  of  Los  Ais.  The  documents 
represent  this  ranch  as  "already  a  pueblo,"  and  tell  us  that  Ybarbo 
possessed  there  a  large  amount  of  stock.  In  addition  to  his  ranch- 
ing interests  he  was  also  a  trader,  having  for  several  years  main- 
tained commercial  relations,  both  at  Adaes  and  El  Lobanillo,  with 
a  wealthy  French  merchant,  Nicolas  de  la  Mathe,  from  Point 
Coupee,4  Louisiana.5 

*See  page  89. 

2According  to  a  statement  made  by  Ybarbo  in  1792  he  was  then  sixty- 
three  years  old.  This  would  have  made  him  about  forty-four  years  old 
in  1773.  See  a  census  of  Nacogdoches,  dated  at  Bexar,  Dec.  31,  1792,  and 
signed  by  Ybarbo  ( Bexar  Archives ) . 

3This  statement  is  based  on  the  assertion  of  Juan  Ugalde,  comandante 
general  of  the  Eastern  Internal  Provinces,  who  was  hostile  to  Ybarbo,  and 
who,  at  the  time  he  made  the  assertion,  was  trying  to  secure  Ybarbo's 
removal  from  office  (Ugalde  to  the  viceroy,  Oct.  30,  1788,  in  Consulta  del 
Sr.  Comandante  GraL,  etc.,  9-11). 

*The  Spanish  documents  render  this  name  Punta  Cortada  or  Puente 
Cortada. 

"Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  9;  testimony  of  Fr.  Josef  Francisco  Mariano 
de  la  Garza,  Nov.  14,  1787  (Bexar  Archives).  Garza  was  for  several 
years  in  charge  of  spiritual  affairs  at  Bucareli  and  Nacogdoches,  and  he 
knew  Ybarbo  well.  His  testimony  was  that  of  a  warm  supporter  of 
Ybarbo,  and  was,  therefore,  not  intended  to  be  damaging  in  any  way. 
For  more  about  Father  Garza,  see  pages  113-115;  and  about  La  Mathe, 
page  108. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    85 

In  view  of  the  hostility  of  the  Spanish  government  toward 
French  trade  among  the  Indians  and  of  the  chronic  complaint 
about  French  smuggling  on  the  border,  Ybarbo's  position  might 
be  regarded  as  a  questionable  one  did  we  not  have  good  reason  to 
suspect  that,  in  spite  of  a  multitude  of  laws,  such  things  were 
customarily  winked  at  by  the  local  officials  and  lightly  regarded 
as  a  question  of  private  morals.  Once  at  least,  however,  Ybarbo's 
trading  activities  had  got  him  into '  trouble.  It  was  during  the 
administration  of  Hugo  Oconor,  who,  in  some  circles,  had  the  un- 
usual reputation  of  having  entirely  put  an  end  to  contraband  trade 
in  Texas.1  This  official  tells  us  that  at  one  time  Ybarbo  had  been 
imprisoned  several  months,  in  handcuffs,  for  complicity  in  the 
sale  at  Natchitoches  and  New  Orleans  of  various  droves  of  mules 
and  horses  stolen  by  the  Indians  from  San  Saba,  Bexar,  and 
Bahia.2  Just  what  form  the  complicity  took  is  not  stated. 

Notwithstanding  his  questionable  pursuits,  he  was  prominent  in 
the  affairs  of  the  locality,  and  was  held  in  favor  by  Oconor's  suc- 
cessor, the  Baron  de  Ripperda.  Because  of  his  prominence,  he  was 
intrusted  by  Governor  Ripperda,  who  had  never  seen  him,  with  the 
administration  of  the  funds  for  purchasing  the  presidial  supplies, 
a  responsibility  which  he  is  said  to  have  discharged  wisely  and 
honest^.3  Other  indications  of  his  good  standing  with  the  gov- 
ernor and  of  his  influence  in  the  affairs  of  Texas  will  appear  as 
the  story  proceeds. 

3.  Consternation  among  the  settlers. — As  soon  as  he  had  arrived 
at  Adaes,  Ripperda  had  issued  an  order  that  within  five  days  every 
one  must  be  ready  for  the  march  to  Bexar.4  To  the  inhabitants 
this  meant  no  less  than  expatriation.  The  love  of  home  is  deeply 
rooted  in  the  human  breast — the  more  deeply  the  simpler  the  peo- 
ple. Many  of  these  had  been  born  and  had  spent  all  their  lives 
in  the  place;  some  had  personal  ties  across  Arroyo  Hondo  in  the 
French  settlement  or  in  the  Indian  villages ;  and  some  had  smaller 
or  larger  material  interests  in  ranches  and  in  Indian  trade. 
It  can  not,  therefore,  cause  surprise  that  the  governor's  order 

JSee  Expediente  sobre  la  dolosa  y  fingida  paz. 

2Oconor  to  the  viceroy,  Dec.  31,  1775.     Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  41. 
Testimony  of  Father  Garza,  Nov.  14,  1787    (BSxar  Arhcives). 
4Yl>arbo  to  Oconor,  Jan.  8,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  6. 


86  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

v  created  a  commotion.  An  extension  of  the  time  was  asked  and  a 
few  days  were  granted.1  A  number  of  persons,  thirty-five  accord- 
ing to  the  reports,  refusing  to  be  thus  evicted,  fled  to  the  woods, 
Most  of  the  inhabitants,  however,  prepared  to  obey  the  command, 
though  apparently  with  bad  grace  in  some  cases,  for  complaint 
was  made  against  Gonzalez  that  "when  the  day  for  leaving  arrived 
he  mounted  a  horse  and  went  from  house  to  house,  driving  the 
people  from  them/'2  This,  no  doubt,  reflects  the  unwillingness  of 
the  people  to  leave  rather  than  any  harshness  on  the  part  of  the 
old  officer. 

The  sudden  removal  involved,  of  course,  the  abandonment  of 
whatever  permanent  improvements  the  settlers  had  made,  small 
in  general  though  these  doubtless  were.  The  urgency  of  the  order 
did  not  allow  time  for  suitable  preparation  for  the  march.  The 
people  were  without  supplies  sufficient  for  so  long  a  journey. 
Their  stock,  of  which  they  seem  to  have  had  considerable,  was 
scattered,  and  much  of  it  could  not  be  collected.  Corn  was  nearly 
ready  for  harvesting,  but  it  had  to  be  abandoned.  Some  things 
which  could  not  be  carried,  including  the  gun  carriages,  some  of 
the  cannons,  and  the  greater  part  of  the  ammunition,  were  buried 
within  the  presidio. ,3 

4.  The  journey  to  San  Antonio  de  Bexar. — On  June  25,  the 
da}r  appointed,  the  weary  three  months'  journey  from  Adaes  to 
San  Antonio  de  Bexar  was  begun.  When  the  company  reached 
Ybarbo's  ranch  at  El  Lobanillo,  twenty-four  persons  dropped  be- 
hind, some  being  too  ill  to  travel,  others  staying  to  care  for  the  sick. 
Several  of  these  were  of  Ybarbo's  family.  His  mother,  sister,  and 

^Ybarbo  does  not  mention  the  request  for  or  the  granting  of  the  ex- 
tension of  time  in  his  complaints  about  the  hardships  of  the  Adaesans. 
But  RipperdS,  (letter  to  the  viceroy,  July  11,  1773)  says  that  such  a  re- 
quest was  made  and  conceded,  a  statement  that  is  borne  out  by  other  evi- 
dence. Ripperda  left  Bexar  for  Adaes  on  May  25th.  He  says  he  was 
twelve  days  going,  eight  days  there,  and  twelve  days  returning.  He  must 
have  arrived  in  Adaes,  therefore,  on  June  6th,  and  left  on  the  14th.  His 
final  order  required  that  Adaes  be  abandoned  on  June  26th  (Letter  No. 
30,  Vol.  100,  Provincias  Internas,  Archivo  General). 

5Ybarbo  to  Oconor,  Jan.  8,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  6. 

"Ripperdd  to  the  viceroy,  Sept.  28,  1773,  in  Autos,  21-22;  Ybarbo  to 
Oconor,  Jan.  8,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  6. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    87 

sister-in-law  were,  it  was  represented,  all  unable  to  make  the  trip, 
and  Ybarbo  had  secured  from  the  governor  a  written  permission 
to  leave  them,,  and  with  them  his  son  and  another  family.1  These 
facts,  considered  in  connection  with  subsequent  events,  lead  one  to 
suspect  that  Ybarbo  was  not  at  this  time  intending  to  abandon  his 
home  for  good  and  all.  At  mission  Nacogdoches  nine  persons, 
comprising  two  families,  dropped  out,  at  the  request,  so  the  story 
goes,  of  the  Texas  chief,  Vigotes,  who  declared  his  intention  of  going 
to  Bexar  with  his  people  to  beg  the  governor  to  allow  the  Spaniards 
to  return  with  a  padre.  At  this  place  the  aged  Gonzalez  and  two 
women  died.  In  Gonzalez's  stead,  the  sergeant  took  charge  of  the 
march. 

According  to  the  reports,  after  leaving  Nacogdoches  the  suffering 
of  the  emigrants  was  severe.2  They  were  poorly  supplied  with 
beasts  of  burden,  and  many  of  them,  women  as  well  as  men,  had 
to  go  on  foot  till  they  reached  the  Brazos.  In  order  to  obtain 
food  some  were  forced  to  sell  not  only  their  clothing,  but  even 
their  rosaries  and  other  sacred  treasures.  Owing  to  this  scarcity 
of  food,  the  drought  experienced  during  the  first  half  of  the  way, 
and  the  heavy  floods  encountered  on  the  latter  portion,  there  was 
much  sickness  among  both  people  and  animals,  as  a  result  of 
which  ten  children  died,  and  some  of  the  cattle  were  lost.  At  the 
Brazos,  however,  the  party  was  met  by  supplies  and  mules  sent  out 
by  the  governor,  and  the  suffering  was  relieved.  At  Arroyo  del 
Cibolo,  where,  in  pursuance  of  the  royal  order,  a  garrison  of  twenty 
men  had  just  been  stationed  by  the  governor,8  a  few  more  persons 

1  Ybarbo  to  Oconor,  Jan.  8,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  7. 

'Gonzales  died  on  July  30th,  hence  more  than  a  month  was  consumed  in 
getting  past  Nacogdoches.  This  does  not  indicate  any  great  haste 
(Autos,  22). 

"Arroyo  del  Cibolo  was  doubtless  identical  with  modern  Cibolo  Creek, 
which  joins  the  San  Antonio  River  about  half  way  between  San  Antonio 
and  Goliad,  or  old  Bahla  del  Esplritu  Santo.  According  to  Governor 
Ripperda,  the  settlement  on  this  arroyo  was  located  "at  the  crossing  of 
the  Texas  and  the  Tuacanes"  (Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  Nov.  25,  1773. 
Letter  No.  52,  Vol.  100,  Provincias  Interims,  Archive  General).  Accord- 
ing to  a  representation  made  by  the  government  of  the  villa  of  San  Fer- 
anado  to  Croix,  Jan.  12,  1778  (Los  Vecinos,  etc.,  10)  it  was  about  eight- 
een leagues  eastward  from  San  Antonio  de  B6xar.  In  1782  the  ranches  here 
were  six  in  number,  with  a  population  of  85.  Some  twenty-five  ranches 


88  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

dropped  out  of  the  company.  Finally,  on  Sept.  26,  the  residue 
straggled  into  Bexar,  foot-sore,  and  so  broken  in  health  that  within 
some  three  months  more  than  thirty  others  died.  With  the  party 
had  come  the  four  missionaries1  from  Adaes,  Los  Ais,  and  Nacog- 
doches.  The  soldiers  brought  with  them,  drawn  by  the  oxen  of 
the  settlers,  twelve  four-pound  cannons,  fifteen  boxes  of  ammuni- 
tion and  eight  tercios  of  gun-carriage  iron.2 

5.  The  aftermath. — No  sooner  had  the  Spaniards  left  Adaes 
than  the  neighboring  Indians  raided  the  place,  scattered  things 
about,  and  unearthed  and  carried  away  part  of  the  ammunition 
and  other  effects  buried  within  the  presidio.3  But  the  Indians 
did  not  get  all  the  spoils,  for  the  families  left  at  El  Lobanillo  ap- 
peared upon  the  scene  and  saved  what  they  could.4  The  runaways 
from  Adaes  shortly  transferred  their  headquarter  to  El  Lobanillo. 
On  September  13,  Pellier,  in  command  at  Natchitoches,  wrote  to 
Ripperda  that  "many  fugitives  who  escaped  from  the  convoy  from 
los  Adaes  have  taken  refuge  at  Lobanillo.  They  come  surrepti- 
tiously to  my  post  in  search  of  liquor  (aguardiente)  with  the  pur- 
pose of  introducing  it  into  the  tribes."5  With  the  Spanish  gar- 
rison removed,  the  French  apparently  flocked  in  to  trade  and  live 
among  the  Indians  in  greater  numbers  than  before.6 

had  been  abandoned  (see  Bancroft,  North  Mexican  States  and  Texas,  I, 
632).  For  additional  information  concerning  this  settlement,  see  Los 
Vecinos,  etc.,  passim. 

'Accoring  to  Rub!   (see  ante,  p.  75)   there  had  been  five  in  1767. 

2Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  Sept.  28,  1773;  petition  of  Ybarbo  and  others 
to  the  governor,  Oct.  4,  1773 — both  in  Autos,  21-22,4.  Ybarbo  to  Oconor, 
Jan.  8,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  7. 

Four  of  the  cannons  brought  to  Be"xar  were  -ordered  sent  to  Monclova 
(the  viceroy  to  Ripperda,  Feb.  9,  1774,  in  Vol.  99,  Provincias  Internas). 

"Testimony  of  a  Spaniard  who  returned  to  Adaes  for  a  sick  man  who 
had  been  left  behind  (Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  Sept.  28,  1773,  in  Autos, 
21-22). 

4Oconor  to  Ripperda,  Feb.  17,  1774,  reviewing  a  letter  which  he  had  re- 
ceived from  Ripperda. 

'Volume  100,  Provincias  Internas.  The  original  letter  is  in  French.  It 
is  accompanied  by  a  translation  into  Spanish. 

'Ybarbo,  in  writing  to  Oconor,  Jan.  8,  1774,  said:  "Scarcely  had  we 
left  when  Frenchmen  settled  in  all  the  nations.  This  report  we  got 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.     89 

So  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  ascertain,  some  of  these  people 
never  left  El  Lobanillo,  although  orders  were  given  to  remove  them, 
and  Ybarbo  did  remove  some  of  them.  Thus  it  is  possible,  and 
even  probable,  that  in  spite  of  government  commands  the  frontier 

was  never  wholly  abandoned. 

i 

IV.       THE  ATTEMPT  TO  SETTLE  AT  LOS  AIS. 

1.  The  petition  of  the  Adaesans. — As  soon  as  the  Adaesans  ar- 
rived at  Bexar,  Ripperda,  in  accordance  with  his  instructions,  pro- 
mulgated among  them  an  order  to  choose  anywhere  within  the 
villa  of  San  Fernando  such  lands  as  they  desired  for  their  building 
spots,  fields,  and  pastures,  providing  that  by  the  choice  they  should 
not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  settlers  or  of  the  Indians  at 
the  missions.  Thinking  that  the  families  who  had  stopped  at 
Arroyo  del  Cibolo  could  do  no  better  than  to  settle  there,  he  sent  a 
lieutenant,  to  that  place  to  lay  out  lands  for  them  in  case  they 
chose  to  remain  there.1 

But  the  Adaesans,  both  those  at  Arroyo  del  Cibolo  and  those  at 
Bexar,  promptly  refused  to  choose  lands  or  to  accept  them,  for 
they  wished  to  return  to  the  eastern  frontier;2  and  eight  days 
after  arriving,  they  presented  to  the  governor  a  petition  to 
that  effect,  signed  by  seventy-five  men.3  It  stated  that  the  lo- 

from  a  Spaniard  who  remained  behind  sick,  as  well  as  from  one  of  the 
French  traders  who  came  with  some  Indians  and  reported  the  fact" 
( Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  8 ) . 

'Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  Sept.  28,  and  Dec.  10,  1773,  in  Autos,  8,  21; 
Ybarbo  to  Oconor,  Jan.  8,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  8. 

'Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  Sept.  28,  1773,  in  Autos,  21. 

"Only  seventy-five  names  appear  on  the  copy  of  the  petition  in  my 
possession,  but  Ripperda  says  there  were  seventy -six  (Reply  to  the  peti- 
tioners, in  Autos,  5).  It  may  be  that  the  original  petition  contained 
seventy-six.  Ripperda  stated  that  the  families  of  these  petitioners  in- 
cluded 126  persons,  which  would  make  202  individuals  represented  by  the 
petition.  In  a  leter  of  Dec.  11,  1773,  the  governor  says  the  petition  rep- 
resented the  majority  of  the  Adaesans.  If  this  be  true,  his  estimate  of 
the  number  of  persons  on  the  fronties  (see  page  83)  was  too  large,  even  if 
he  meant  to  include  the  soldiers  who  were  there.  According  to  Lieuten- 
ant Pacheco  there  were  in  Bgxar  in  April,  1774,  140  men  from  Adaes 
capable  of  bearing  arms  (Expediente  sobre  la  dolosa  y  fingida  paz,  13). 


90  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

cality  at  San  Fernando  offered  little  or  no  opportunity  to  form  a 
settlement  without  encroaching  upon  the  rights  of  others;1  that, 
because  of  the  loss  of  all  their  property  through  the  removal  from 
the  frontier,  the  petitioners  were  bankrupt  and  could  not  make  the 
proposed  aqueduct;  that  they  wished  permission  to  form  a  new 
pueblo  at  the  old  mission  of  Nuestra  Senora  de  los  Dolores  de  los 
Ais,  where,  because  of  its  nearness  to  Adaes,  they  might  be 
able  to  recover  some  of  the  goods  they  had  left  scattered  at  their 
former  homes;  and  that  they  hoped  that,  because  of  their  known 
loyalty,  their  sufferings  on  the  way  from  Adaes,  and  their  present 
need,  their  prayer  would  be  granted.  In  this  event  they  agreed  to 
bear,  themselves,  all  the  expense  of  the  return,  except  for  the  sup- 
port of  a  chaplain,  whom  they  wished  provided  at  government  ex- 
pense for  ten  years.2 

There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  sincerity  of  these  petitioners  so 
far  as  their  request  to  be  allowed  to  return  to  the  frontier  is  con- 
cerned. But  the  claim  that  there  was  no  room  for  them  at  Bexar 
was  absurd,  while  the  choice  of  the  particular  location  asked  for  is 
suggestive  of  the  part  played  by  Gil  Ybarbo  in  the  matter.  Mis- 
sion Los  Ais  was  close  by  his  ranch,  El  Lobanillo.  He  was  the 
person  who  had  the  most  to  lose  by  being  driven  from  the  frontier. 
He  was  the  most  influential  man  among  them,  acting  as  spokes- 
man for  the  rest,  and,  naturally  enough,  his  interests  were  not  for- 
gotten in  the  choice  of  a  site  for  a  new  settlement.  At  El  Lo- 
banillo he  had  left  his  family;  here  he  hoped  to  recover  his  lost 
stock  and  other  property;  here  he  had  a  ranch  well  established; 
and  it  may  be  supposed  that,  as  was  afterwards  charged,  he  was 
loath  to  abandon  the  interests  he  had  developed  in  contraband 
trade.  Other  persons  who  signed  the  petition  were,  no  doubt,  for 
similar  reasons  genuinely  anxious  to  return,  but  the  impression 
remains,  nevertheless,  that,  although  he  represented  the  sincere 
wishes  of  his  neighbors,  Ybarbo  was  the  moving  spirit  in  the  at- 
tempt to  undo  the  policy  of  the  government. 

2.     Ripperdd  favors  the  petition. — The  petitioners  probably  ex- 

xln  a  letter  to  Oconor,  Ybarbo  said  that  the  country  from  the  B§xar 
to  the  Guadalupe  was  "overrun  (infestado)  with  stock,  missions,  and 
men"  (Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  7). 

'Petition  of  Gil  Ybarbo  and  others,  Oct.  4,  1773,  in  Autos,  1-5. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    91 

pected  support  from  Ripperda, — indeed  he  may  have  encouraged 
them  to  present  their  request, — for  it  was  known  that  withdrawal 
from  the  frontier  was  not  in  accord  with  his  desires.  Ever  since  he 
had  become  governor  he  had  taken,  under  the  influence  of  Captain 
Atanacio  de  Mezieres  y  Clugnes,  of  Natchitoches,  a  definite  posi- 
tion regarding  relations  with  the  northeastern  tribes.  Of  first  im- 
portance was  to  keep  them  under  Spanish  influence  so  that  they  not 
only  would  remain  friendly  themselves,  but  also  might  be  used 
against  the  enemies  of  the  Spaniards,  particularly  the  Apaches  and 
the  Comanches.  This  was  the  key-note  of  his  dealings  with  the 
northeastern  Indians,  and  it  seems  to  have  been  a  foremost  con- 
sideration in  his  relations  with  Ybarbo. 

Through  the  aid  of  Mezieres  and  Father  Ramirez,  president  of 
the  Texas  missions,  Ripperda  had  in  1771  and  1772  ratified  treaties 
of  friendship  with  several  of  the  northernmost  tribes,1  who  had 
formerly  been  considered  as  enemies,  and,  at  Mezieres's  suggestion, 
he  had  advocated  enlisting  these  new  friends  in  a  campaign  against 
the  Apaches.2  He  maintained,  moreover,  that  they  could  not  be 
kept  friendly  unless,  like  the  French,  the  Spaniards  would  supply 
them  with  fire-arms  and  ammunition.  Otherwise,  he  said,  they 
would  prefer  war  to  peace,  for  the  sake  of  an  excuse  for  engaging 
in  their  favorite  pastime  of  stealing  horses  from  the  Spaniards  and 
selling  them  to  the  French.  As  an  additional  means  of  cementing 
their  friendship  he  recommended  establishing  among  them  a  new 
presidio,  with  a  colony  of  citizens  and  a  mission  near  it. 

With  foreign  enemies  as  well  as  the  Indians  in  view,  he  advo- 
cated extending  a  line  of  presidios  clear  from  New  Mexico  to  the 

irThe  principal  ones  of  these  were  the  Quitseis  (Keechis),  west  or  a  lit- 
tle northwest  of  Nacogdoches;  the  Yscanis,  a  short  distance  west  of  the 
Quitseis;  the  Tawakanas  on  the  Trinity  and  the  Brazos  rivers  west  of  the 
Yscanis;  the  Tonkawas,  who  lived  a  wandering  life  between  the  middle 
courses  of  the  Brazos  and  the  Trinity;  the  Xaranames,  apostates  from  the 
mission  at  Bahfa,  now  living  among  or  near  the  Tawakanas;  the  Ovedsitai 
( Wichitas?),  living  on  the  Salt  Fork  of  the  Brazos;  and  the  Taovayases 
(Towash?),  living  northeast  of  the  Ovedsitas  on  the  Red  River  west  of 
one  of  the  Cross  Timbers  ( Mezifcres,  Inf orme,  passim ) . 

'Meziftres  to  Ripperda,  July  4,  1772,  in  Expediente  sobre  proposiciones, 
24-61.  Bonilla,  Breve  Compendia,  66. 


92  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

Mississippi.1  A  new  argument  for  more  strongly  defending  the 
eastern  frontier  was  now  available  and  was  made  use  of  by  Rip- 
perda to  support  this  proposal.  It  was  not  long  after  the  cession 
of  the  country  east  of  the  Mississippi  to  the  English  before  there 
began  to  be  talk  of  danger  from  that  quarter,  much  as  formerly 
there  has  been  talk  of  danger  from  the  French.  Rubi  had  said  he 
did  not  entertain  any  such  fears2  although  others  did.  Later  on, 
rumors  floated  in  from  the  north  that  gave  some  ground  for  such 
apprehensions.  Mezieres  claimed  that  when  he  was  on  his  ex- 
tended tour  among  the  northern  Indians  in  1772,  carrying  to  them 
the  sword  and  the  olive  branch,  he  found  among  the  Taovayases  a 
certain  Indian,  named  Jose,  who  was  engaged  in  bringing  from 
the  Pams-Mahas  (Pawnees?)  firearms  of  foreign — that  is,  neither 
French  nor  Spanish — make.  He  found  there  also  two  Panis-Mahas 
advertising  the  advantages  of  trading  with  the  English.  These  he 
brought  to  Bexar  to  be  questioned  on  the  subject.3  In  addition  to 
these  things,  Mezieres  declared  the  Osage  Indians  to  be  hostile  to 
the  Spaniards  and  friendly  toward  the  English.4 

Mezieres's  report  convinced  Ripperda  that,  to  keep  them  from 
contamination,  the  Taovayases  and  Ovedsitas  should  be  brought 
from  their  remote  homes  on  the  upper  Brazos  and  the  upper  Red 
rivers  to  the  interior,  and  the  new  presidio  established  among  them ; 
and  he  saw  in  the  situation  of  the  Osages  and  the  threatened  Eng- 
lish trade  an  additional  argument  for  keeping  an  influence  over  all 
the  northern  Indians,  namely,  that  they  might  be  used  eventually 
in  driving  the  Osages  and  their  allies  across  the  Missouri  River, 
or  even  in  repelling  an  invasion  by  the  English  themselves. 

The  eastern  tribes,  living  between  Adaes  and  the  middle  Trinity 
were  generally  friendly  toward  the  Spaniards,  but  recently  sus- 
picion had  arisen  that  the  Vidais  and  the  Texas  were  becoming 

'Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  April  28,  1772,  and  July  5,  1772,  in  Expe- 
diente  sobre  proposiciones,  2-3,  19-20;  Bonilla,  Breve  Compendia,  65-66. 
Ripperda  had  earlier  than  this  expressed  similar  opinions.  See  the  in- 
form e  of  Barrios  to  the  viceroy,  Nov.  6,  1771,  in  Vol.  99,  Provinciaa 
Internas,  Archive  General. 

'Dictamen,  paragraph  17. 

slnforme  del  Capn.  infanta.  Dn.  Athanacio  de  Mezieres  al  Sr.  Coronel 
Baron  de  Ripperda,  July  4,  1772,  in  Expediente  sobre  proposiciones,  37-39. 

'Ibid. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    93 

too  friendly  toward  the  Apaches,  the  worst  enemy  of  the  Spaniards. 
Kipperda,  therefore,  favored  establishing  a  closer  surveillance  over 
these  tribes.1 

It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  that  the  governor,  entertaining 
for  the  frontier  such  plans  as  these,  should  use  his  influence  in 
behalf  of  the  Adaesans,  whose  wish  accorded  so  well  with  his.  He 
replied  to  the  petitioners  that  he  could  not  grant  their  request 
without  the  infraction  of  a  royal  command, — that  is,  the  king's 
order  of  1772, — but  that  he  sympathized  with  their  cause,  and 
that  if  they  could  not  find  suitable  lands  at  San  Fernando,  at 
Arroyo  del  Cibolo,  or  in  any  of  the  old  ranches  in  the  neighbor- 
hood, they  might  carry  their  petition  to  the  viceroy.2 

3.  Ybarbo  and  Florcs  sent  to  Mexico. — After  some  delay,  dur- 
ing which  an  attempt  may  have  been  made  to  find  lands  to  their 
liking,  although  this  is  doubtful,  the  Adaesans  acted 'upon  the  gov- 
ernor's suggestion.  On  December  10,  j.barbo  and  Gil  Flores,  the 
two  most  prominent  of  their  number,3  were  formally  made  the 
authorized  agents  of  the  citizens  to  carry  the  petition  to  the  vice- 
roy.4 When  they  left  Bexar  they  carried  with  them  letters  from 
the  governor  to  the  viceroy  and  Hugo  Oconor.  To  prove  the  need 
of  a  minister  on  the  frontier  they  carried  a  certificate  taken  from 
the  records  just  brought  to  Bexar  of  the  number  of  baptisms  per- 
formed at  the  missions  at  Adaes  and  at  Nacogdoches  during 
their  existence.  This  statement  could  hardly  be  considered  the 
most  convincing  evidence,  for  it  showed  that  in  over  half  a  century 
the  aggregate  number  of  baptisms  at  the  two  missions  had  been 
only  three  hundred  and  forty.5 

In  these  letters  to  the  viceroy  and  the  inspector  general,  Rip- 

^xpediente  sobre  proposiciones,  1-3,  11-17;  Ripperdfi  to  the  viceroy, 
July  5,  1775,  in  Expediente  sobre  propjDsiciones,  19-21. 

'Autos,  5. 

i 

8"We  who  have  most  to  lose"  (Petition  of  Ybarbo  and  Flores,  May  10, 
1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  30. 

4The  certificate  of  authority  is  signed  by  fifty-two  persons  (Autos,  6). 
The  agents  were  elected  by  majority  vote  (Los  Vecinos,  etc.,  7.) 

5The  report  for  the  mission  at  Nacogdoches  extended  from  June  24, 
1717,  to  April  17,  1768,  and  for  that  at  Los  Adaes  from  August  6,  1716, 
to  Feb.  12,  1773  (Autos,  17,  18). 


94  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

perda  made  it  clear  that  an  adverse  royal  order  had  not  served  to 
change  his  mind  with  respect  to  the  frontier.  On  the  contrary,  he 
restated  his  views  with  emphasis. 

He  said  that  he  was  not  fully  informed  of  the  reason  for  having 
abandoned  East  Texas,  but  that  he  believed  it  would  be  ad- 
vantageous to  Bexar  and  the  other  interior  settlements  to  estab- 
lish Spaniards  among  the  northern  Indians,  particularly  the  Ta- 
wakanas  and  Taovayases,1  the  northernmost  and  at  the  same  time 
the  most  numerous  and  powerful  of  all  the  nations  in  the  province. 
Since  these  tribes  were  new  friends,  such  settlements  would,  he 
thought,  be  valuable  as  serving  to  cement  and  retain  their  alliance. 
By  forming  a  militia  of  the  settlers,  a  line  of  defence  would  be 
established  from  Bexar  to  Natchitoches.  The  only  objection  to 
such  a  plan  that  he  could  see  would  be  the  encouragement  that 
might  be  given  by  the  presence  of  the  settlers  to  trade  with  the 
French  at  Natchitoches,  But  that,  he  said,  was  going  on 
briskly  even  now,  not  only  with  the  Taovayases  and  Ta- 
wakanas  and  other  tribes  hitherto  supplied  from  Louisiana, 
but  also  with  those  supposedly  supplied  from  the  interior 
of  Texas,  as  was  proved  by  the  fact  that  these  Indians 
were  so  well  provided  with  goods  that  when  they  came  to 
Bexar  they  even  had  guns  to  sell  to  the  Spaniards.  He  thought, 
moreover,  that  an  attempt  to  close  the  trade  with  Natchitoches 
might  have  even  worse  results,  in  driving  the  Indians  to  trade  with 
the  English,  which  they  could  easily  do.  These  considerations 
induced  him,  he  said,  to  recommend  the  petition  carried  by  Ybarbo 
and  Flores  as  one  worthy  of  careful  consideration.  In  his  letter  to 
Oconor  Bipperda  referred  to  a  private  request  which  Ybarbo  had 
to  make,  and  bespoke  for  him  Oconor's  assistance,  so  that  in  case 
the  main  petition  should  not  be  granted,  "ultimately  his  ranch, 
El  Lobanillo,  might  come  to  form  a  pueblo  of  more  than  sixty 
persons."  From  this  it  seems  probable  that  at  this  time  Ybarbo 
intended  to  ask  permission  to  return  to  his  ranch  without  the  re- 
mainder of  the  petitioners,  to  collect  and  form  a  settlement  of  the 
persons  left  on  the  frontier,  who  numbered  some  sixty  or  more.2 

1  After  bringing  the  latter  to  the  interior,  he  probably  meant. 

2Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  Dec.  10,  1773  (Autos,  8)  and  to  Oconor,  Dec. 
11,  1773  (Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  10-11). 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    95 

It  will  be  seen  further  on  that  the  private  request  actually  made 
of  the  viceroy  was  slightly  different  in  form  from  what  Ripperda 
apparently  understood  it  to  be,  although  it  was  not  essentially  dif- 
ferent in  effect. 

The  commissioners  left  for  Mexico  some  time  in  December  or 
early  in  January.  On  the  8th  of  January  they  were  at  Santa  Rosa 
Maria.  From  this  place  Ybarbo  dispatched  a  letter  to  Oconor, 
who  was  at  Chihuahua.1  In  it  he  set  forth  in  great  detail  the 
hardship  incident  to  the  eviction  from  Adaes  and  the  sad 
plight  of  the  exiles  at  Bexar.  He  said  that  more  than  thirty  of  his 
compatriots  had  died  at  Bexar  previous  to  his  leaving,  and  only 
God  knew  how  many  since;  that  subsequent  to  arriving  there  some 
of  the  families  had  been  forced  to  go  about  the  presidio  and  mis- 
sions begging  and  some  had  even  been  forced  to  steal,  in  conse- 
quence of  which  trouble  had  arisen  with  the  citizens ;  and  that  within 
two  days  after  reaching  Bexar  the  Indians  had  carried  off  the  few 
animals  they  had  brought.  In-  conclusion,  he  said  that  he  thought 
a  settlement  ought  to  be  established  on  the  frontier  to  keep  out  the 
French  who  were  flocking  in,  and  asked  Oconor  to  support  his  de- 
mands. 

4.  The  petition  granted. — Having  arrived  in  Mexico,  the  agents 
presented  their  petition,  together  with  an  address,  on  the  28th  of 
February.  The  readiness  with  which  the  government  now  pro- 
ceeded to  reverse  a  definite  policy  of  the  king  is,  to  say  the  least, 
surprising.  In  his  action  in  the  matter  the  viceroy  was  guided 
almost  entirely  by  the  advice  of  Areche,  the  fiscal,  who,  in  his 
turn,  was  dependent  upon  conflicting  reports  from  Bexar,  Bahia, 
and  Chihuahua.  This  official,  to  whom  the  petition  and  Ripperda's 
letter  were  referred,2  reported3  that  in  his  opinion  the  proposal  to- 
establish  a  settlement  at  Los  Ais  was  commendable,  as  a  means  of 
checking  Indian  assaults;  that  the  king's  reason  for  extinguishing 
the  mission  at  Los  Ais  had  been  that  it  was  without  Indians  and 
useless ;  and  that  the  viceroy  would  do  well  to  grant  the  request  and 

irThe  letter  was   sent  by  Roque  Medina,  assistant  inspector    (Quaderno 
que  Corresponde,  16). 

2On  Feb.  28th. 
•On  March  7th. 


96  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

to  order  the  governor  to  put  the  measure  into  effect.1  He  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  impressed  with  the  argument  predicated  upon 
danger  from  the  English,  for  he  did  not  refer  to  it  in  his  report. 
He  advised  proceeding  through  the  governor  on  the  ground  that 
Oconor's  many  duties  and  his  distance  from  Texas  would  entail 
delay.2 

The  matter  next  went  before  a  junta  de  guerra  y  hacienda  called 
by  the  viceroy  for  the  purpose.  This  body  resolved  that,  in  view 
of  the  situation  of  the  Adaesans,  and,  more  particularly,  of  the  ad-, 
vantage  that  would,  according  to  the  governor,  result  from  a  set- 
tlement on  the  eastern  frontier,  the  petition  should  be  granted; 
that  the  Adaesans  should  be  settled  in  Los  Ais  in  conformity  with 
the  laws  for  the  settlement  of  new  pueblos  and  lugares?  that  the 
viceroy  should  instruct  the  president  of  the  Texas  missions  to  ap- 
point a  minister  for  the  proposed  settlement,  provide  through  the 
sinodo  for  his  equipment  and  maintenance,  and  make  plans  for 
bringing  near  the  new  pueblo  as  many  of  the  surrounding  tribes  as 
possible,  as  a  means  of  keeping  them  quiet  and  of  preventing  their 
communication  with  the  English  and  other  foreigners.  This  de- 
cision of  the  junta  the  viceroy  ordered  carried  out.4 

5.  0 conor  interferes.  —  Thus  far  Ybarbo's  mission  had  pros- 
pered without  a  hitch.  But  a  communication  received  by  the  vice- 
roy suddenly  changed  the  situation.  In  reply  to  Ripperda's  letter 
of  Dec.  11  Oconor  had  written  saying  that  he  could  not  support 
Ybarbo's  petition,  and  ordering1  the  governor  to  bring  to  Bexar 
the  people  and  the  ammunition  left  on  the  frontier.5  To  trie  vice- 
roy he  wrote  in  terms  of  strongest  disapproval  of  the  whole  plan. 
He  said  that  he  was  convinced  that  private  interest,  ignorance, 
mistaken  piety,  and  malice  had  combined  to  defeat  royal  plans 
favorable  to  peace.  Citing  Rubi's  report  as  authority,  he  main- 
tained that  Aclaes  had  long  been  the  seat  of  contraband  trade  in 

1  Autos,  13. 

*Ibid.,  13-14. 

3See  Recopilacion  de  Leyes  de  las  Indias,  Lib.  IV,  Titulo  VII. 

*The  junta  was  held  March  17th,  and  on  March  23d  the  viceroy  gave 
the  order  to  put  its  resolution  into  effect  (Quaderno  que  Corresponde, 
12-13). 

5Oconor  to  Rippperda,  Feb.  17,  1774,  in  Autos,  19-20. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    97 

fire-arms  and  ammunition  carried  on  among  the  northern  Indians 
in  spite  of  numerous  royal  orders,  and  that  the  reason  why  Gil 
Ybarbo  and  his  co-petitioners  wished  to  return  to  Los  Ais  was  to 
engage  in  this  illicit  trade.  Referring  to  an  Indian  who  had  ac- 
companied Ybarbo  and  Flores  to  Mexico,  he  said  that  it  was  sad 
indeed  that  in  addition  to  supporting  so  preposterous  a  petition, 
diametrically  opposed  to  a  royal  order,  Ripperda  should  give  to 
northern  Indians  a  passport  clear  to  the  capital,  thus  enabling 
them  to  learn  the  routes  into  Coahuila  and  the  state  of  its  de- 
fences. Finally,  he  requested  that  Ripperda  should  be  required  to 
carry  out  his  previous  orders  with  respect  to  the  Adaesans,  and  to 
put  a  stop  to  contraband  trade  in  Texas  carried  on  from  Natch- 
itoches.1 

Just  when  this  letter  reached  the  viceroy  does  not  appear,  but 
four  days  after  the  junta  had  granted  Ybarbo's  petition  it  was  re- 
ferred to  Areche.2  A  week  later  he  advised  that  the  recent  action 
be  rescinded,  and  that  a  new  junta  be  called  to  reconsider  the  mat- 
ter in  the  light  of  Oconor's  letter  and  the  reports  of  Rubi  and 
Rivera,  to  which  Oconor  had  referred.  This  plan  was  adopted, 
and  on  May  5  the  new  junta  decided  to  refer  the  matter,  with  full 
testimony,  to  Oconor,  with  authority  to  grant  or  refuse  the  re- 
quest, as  he  thought  best.8  What  his  decision  would  be  could 
hardly  have  been  doubtful  in  the  light  of  his  previous  expressions 
relative  to  the  subject. 

6.  The  matter  temporarily  referred  to  Ripperda. — Upon  learn- 
ing of  the  decision  of  the  junta,  Ybarbo  and  Flores  decided  to  pre- 
sent the  private  petition  to  which  Ripperda  had  referred,4  and  to 
return  to  Texas  without  waiting  for  the  settlement  of  their  main 
business.  Accordingly,  on  May  10,  they  asked  permission  to  re- 
move their  families  temporarily  to  Natchitoches,  as  a  base  of  op- 
erations from  which  to  recover  their  abandoned  property.5  This 

M^conor  to  the  viceroy,  Feb.  21,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  14-17. 

'March  21. 

'Areche  to  the  viceroy,  March  28,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  17-18; 
decision  of  the  junta,  lUd.,  28-29. 

4See  page  94. 

"To  enable  them  to  make  the  journey  home,  they  asked  for  financial  aid 
from  the  government,  which  was  granted  them  in  the  form  of  a  loan. 
During  their  stay  in  Mexico  the  government  had  supplied  them  each  with 
a  stipend  of  two  reals  a  day  (Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  30-32). 


98  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

request  was  refused,  and  on  the  same  day  that  he  referred  the  de- 
cision to  Oconor  the  viceroy  instructed  Ripperda  that  he  must  not 
permit  Ybarbo  and  Flores  to  go  to  Natchitoches  under  any  consid- 
eration. But  the  force  of  this  prohibition  was  greatly  weakened 
by  adding  to  it  the  very  elastic  instruction  that  he  should  give 
Ybarbo  and  Flores  aid  in  locating  the  Adaesans  "in  a  suitable 
place."1  It  seems  that  the  viceroy  verbally  told  Ybarbo  that  the 
new  settlement  must  be  one  hundred  leagues  from  Natchitoches, 
meaning,  doubtless,  that  it  should  be  no  nearer  than  this.2 

Thus  on  one  and  the  same  day  the  viceroy  had  left  the  matter 
in  the  hands  of  two  different  persons  whose  policies  were  at  vari- 
ance. While  Bucareli  doubtless  intended  Ripperda  to  make  only  a 
temporary  arrangement  pending  Oconor's  decision,  this  vacillating 
and  double  policy  left  open  the  way  for  misunderstanding  and  for 
the  eventual  defeat  of  the  royal  plans,  a  result  which  was  fostered 
also  by  Oconor's  preoccupation  and  his  procrastination.  After  a 
lapse  of  six  weeks  Oconor  asked  to  be  relieved  from  the  respon- 
sibility imposed  upon  him,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  an  affair  of 
Ripperda's,  and  that  he  was  too  far  away  and  too  busy  to  perform 
the  duty.  The  viceroy  insisted,  however,  but  long  before  Oconor 
was  ready  to  turn  his  attention  to  the  affair,  Ripperda  had  made 
arrangements  difficult  to  set  aside.3  When  Oconor  took  the  matter 
up  with  Ripperda,  the  latter  replied  that  he  had  already  established 
the  Adaesans  in  a  settlement.  Apparently  in  ignorance  of  the 
viceroy's  order  of  May  17  to  Ripperda,  Oconor  now  reprimanded 
the  governor  for  exceeding  his  authority,  since  the  decision  had 
been  left  to  himself.  To  this  the  governor  naturally  replied  that 
he  had  acted  according  to  the  viceroy's  orders,  and  this  informa- 
tion Oconor  chose  to  consider  an  excuse  for  another  year's  inaction. 

^'Donde  corresponde,  segun  lo  que  esta  prevenido"  (The  viceroy  to  Rip- 
perda, May  17,  1774,  in  the  Bexar  Archives).  See  also  Oconor  to  th« 
viceroy,  Dec.  31,  1775,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  42. 

•Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  Sept.  10,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corre- 
sponde, 34. 

•Oconor  to  the  viceroy,  July  5,  1775,  and  Dec.  31,  1775;  the  viceroy  to 
Oconor,  August  30,  1775;  Oconor  to  Ripperda,  Nov.  20,  1775;  and  Rip- 
perda to  Oconor,  Feb.  5,  1775 — all  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  40-54. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    99 

V.       THE  SETTLEMENT  AT  PILAR  DE  BUCARELI,  1774-1779. J 

1.  The  selection  of  a  site  for  the  Adaesans. — The  location  of 
the  Adaesans  was  thus  left  temporarily,  until  Oconor  should  inter- 
fere, to  Ripperda,  with  only  the  restriction  that  the  place  chosen 
must  be  at  least  one  hundred  leagues  from  Natchitoches.  In  the 
performance  of  this  commission  he  again  showed  his  sympathy 
with  the  desires  of  Ybarbo  and  his  opposition  to  the  royal  policy 
by  sending  the  Adaesans  to  a  place  as  far  from  Bexar  and  as  near 
to  the  northeastern  frontier  as  the  terms  of  his  authority  would 
allow. 

The  site  designated  by  him  was  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Trinity 
River,  at  Paso  Tomas,  which  was  apparently  at  the  crossing 
of  the  Old  San  Antonio  Road  and  the  La  Bahia  Road  over  that 
stream.  This  opinion  as  to  the  location  of  Paso  Tomas  is  based 
upon  the  following  data:  Ripperda  said  that  it  was  the  place 
where  "the  lower  Adaes  road,"  or,  as  he  otherwise  described  it, 
"the  road  leading  [from  Bexar]  to  ...  Adaes  and  Orco- 
quisac"  crossed  the  Trinity.2  We  are  told,  too,  that  it  was  above 
Orcoquisac,3  and  considerably  nearer  to  Nacogdoches  than  to  the 
coast,  the  distances  to  these  places  being  roughly  in  the  proportion 
of  two  to  three.4  It  must,  therefore,  if  this  be  true,  have 
been  at  least  as  far  up  the  river  as  the  upper  portion  of  Walker 
County.  It  was,  moreover,  at  a  point  in  a  pretty  direct  line  be- 

*The  fullest  printed  account  of  this  settlement,  so  far  as  I  know,  is  the 
one  by  Bancroft  (North  Mexican  States  and  Texas,  I,  630),  which  occu- 
pies only  a  page,  and  that  marred  by  errors  and  half  truths. 

'Ripperda  (writing  from  Bexar)  to  the  viceroy,  September  1,  1774,  and 
November  15,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  34-36. 

3Ybarbo,  in  describing  a  trip  made  by  him  to  the  coast  in  1777,  said 
that  he  went  through  Orcoquisac.  See  a  summary  of  his  report  in  a  let- 
ter from  Ripperda  to  Croix,  August  30,  1777,  in  Expediente  sobre.  .  .  . 
Parroco,  13-19. 

4Ripperda  said  that  Paso  Tomas  was  "three  regular  days  [march]  from 
the  coast"  (Letter  to  the  viceroy,  November  15,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que 
Corresponde,  36).  Ybarbo  reported  that  it  was  only  a  two  days'  march 
from  the  Texas  village  at  Nacogdoches  (Letter  to  Croix,  May  13,  1779). 


100  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

tween  Nacogdoches  and  Bexar,1  and  could  not,  therefore,  have  been 
very  far  from  the  Old  San  Antonio  Eoad  which,  it  has  usually  been 
supposed,  passed  very  directly  between  these  places.  It  was,  finally, 
in  the  Vidais  country,  their  main  village  being  within  two  leagues.2 
The  location  of  this  tribe  in  the  later  Spanish  period  of  Texas  his- 
tory is  marked  in  modern  geography  by  Bidais  Creek,  which  flows 
into  the  Trinity  River  between  Walker  and  Madison  counties. 

These  data,  taken  all  together,  make  it  seem  probable,  as  has 
been  said,  that  Paso  Tonias  was  at  the  crossing  of  the  Old 
San  Antonio  Road  and  the  La  Bahia  Road  over  the  Trinity.  The 
La  Bahia  Road  could  with  propriety  have  been  referred  to  as  the 
lower  Adaes  road,  and  at  the  same  time  as  the  road  leading  from 
Bexar  to  Adaes  and  Orcoquisac.  Moreover,  according  to  most  of 
the  old  maps,  the  Old  San  Antonio  Road  and  the  La  Bahia  Road 
crossed  the  Trinity  together  at  a  point  above  the  mouth  of  Bidais 
Creek.3  This  place  has  in  modern  times  been  identified  with  the 
crossing  known  as  Robbins's  Ferry,  at  the  old  village  of  Randolph, 
in  Madison  County. 

2.     The  reasons  assigned  for  the  selection. — The  reasons  given 

r-'' 

Francisco  Xavier  Fragoso,  in  company  with  Pedro  Vial,  made,  in  1788, 
a  careful  survey  of  the  distances  from  Santa  F6  to  Natchitoches,  from 
Natchitoches  to  B6xar,  and  from  Bexar  to  Santa  F6.  As  he  had  been 
sent  out  expressly  to  survey  these  routes,  we  should  be  able  to  place  de- 
pendence upon  what  he  says  about  directions  and  distances.  According 
to  his  diary  practically  no  change  was  made  from  a  southwesterly  direc- 
tion in  passing  from  Nacogdoches  to  Bexar.  He  was  on  one  of  the  well 
known  routes  across  Texas,  which  was  in  all  likelihood  the  Old  San  An- 
tonio Road.  On  the  way  between  these  two  places  he  passed  through  the 
abandoned  site  of  Bucareli,  as  the  settlement  made  at  Paso  Tomas  was 
called  (Fragosa,  "Derrotero,  Diario,  y  Calculacion  de  Leguas,"  etc.  See 
bibliographical  note,  page  69.) 

2Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  November  15,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corre- 
sponde,  36,  and  to  Croix,  April  27,  1777,  in  Documentos  para  la  Historia 
.  .  .  de  Texas,  XXVIII,  224. 

3See  Austin's  map,  made  in  1835,  in  Bancroft,  North  Mexican  States 
and  Texas,  II,  75;  another  map  made  in  1835,  given  in  Wooten,  A  Com- 
prehensive History  of  Texas,  I,  784;  E.  E.  Lee's  map  of  Texas,  made  in 
1836,  in  McMaster,  History  of  the  People  of  the  United  States,  V,  12; 
John  Arrowsmith's  map,  made  in  1840,  in  Kennedy,  Texas,  I  (2d  ed.,  1841). 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.  101 

by  Ripperda  in  his  correspondence,  either  directly  or  by  implica- 
tion, for  the  selection  of  this  site,  were,  briefly  stated,  (1)  that 
Paso  Tomas  was  on  the  highway  from  Bexar  to  Natchitoches,  some- 
where ne&ir-  midway,  and  that  a  settlement  there  would  facilitate 
communication  between  the  two  places;  (2)  that  it  was  sheltered 
from  the  Comanches  through  having  between  it  and  this  dread  foe 
the  friendly  Tawakanas  and  Tonkawas;  (3)  that  it  was  in  an  agri- 
cultural region  of  extreme  richness,  which  might  be  expected  later 
on  to  provide  the  presidios  of  Bexar  and  Bahia  with  horses  and  cer- 
tain other  products  that  then  came  from  outside;  (4)  that  it  would 
be  a  good  place  from  which  to  watch  and  cut  off  French  contraband 
trade;  (5)  that  it  lay  in  the  midst  of  a  number  of  friendly  Indian 
tribes,  some  to  the  north  and  some  to  the  south,  which  fact  gave  it 
special  advantages  as  a  base  of  operations  for  keeping  them 
amicable  and  for  doing  missionary  work  among  them;  (6)  and 
finally,  that  it  was  a  vantage  point  from  which  to  guard  the  Gulf 
coast  from  the  inroads  of  the  English,1  who  were  now  beginning 
to  be  feared  in  that  direction  as  well  as  toward  the  northeas^K^ 
The  last  two  reasons  were  the  ones  most  emphasized  by  tne  gov- 
ernor. His  desire  to  establish  and  maintain  an  influence  over  the 
northeastern  tribes  has  already  been  set  forth.  His  emphasis  of 
danger  from  the  English  may  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that 
rumors  of  English  traders  on  the  Gulf  coast  were  becoming  numer- 
ous. An  example  of  these  rumors  may  be  of  interest.  In  the 
fall  of  1772  it  was  reported  that  Englishmen  were  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  the  mouth  of  the  Trinity  cutting  wood  for  houses  and  giv- 
ing presents  to  the  Indians.  Captain  Cazorla,  commander  of  the 
garrison  at  Bahia,  was  sent  out  to  investigate  the  ground  for  such 
a  tale.  He  spent  about  a  month  on  the  expedition,  and  heard  in 

'See1  letters  of  Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  September  1,  and  November  15, 
1774,  and  January  15,  1776,  in  Quaderno  que  Correspond^  34-36,  68-70; 
Ripperda  to  Criox,  October  28,  1777,  in  Representacion  del  Justicia,  3. 
When  Mezieres  visited  Bucareli  in  1778  he  gave  essentially  the  above  rea- 
sons why  the  place  should  be  fostered,  adding  the  argument  that  the 
Trinity  would  offer  a  good  outlet  to  New  Orleans  for  the  abundant  prod- 
ucts sure  to  be  raised  in  the  new  settlement.  This  argument  was  based 
on  the  assumption  that  trade  between  Texas  and  Louisiana  would  be 
allowed.  Mezieres  to  Croix,  March  18,  1778,  in  Expediente  sobre  el 
abandono  .  .  .  y  establecer  Comercio  con  los  Yndios  Gentiles,  2. 


102  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

the  neighborhood  of  the  Trinity  reports  of  English  traders,  and 
found  what  he  thought  to  be  English  guns.  The  Indians  at  a 
rancheria  above  Orcoquisac,  reputed  to  be  a  center  for  French 
trade,  told  him  that  some  Frenchmen  living  across  the  Neches  in 
Louisiana  were  procuring  these  guns  from  Englishmen  and  bring- 
ing them  to  the  Trinity,  but  that  the  French  would  not  allow  the 
English  traders  to  come  to  the  Indian  villages  in  person.1  Other 
reports  of  this  kind  were  not  lacking,  and  taken  all  together  they 
may  have  caused  the  governor  genuine  uneasiness.  He  hoped,  per- 
haps, in  a  settlement  of  the  Adaesans  on  the  Trinity,  for  a  partial 
restoration  of  the  coast  protection  that  had  recently  been  with- 
drawn by  the  removal  of  the  garrison  from  Orcoquisac.2  .  That 
this  was  a  genuine  consideration  with  Ripper  da  is  borne  out  by 
Ybarbo's  activities  on  the  coast,  under  the  governor's  direction, 
after  settling  on  the  Trinity.  But  the  fact  that  Paso  Tomas,  in 
the  midst  of  a  large  number  of  northeastern  tribes,  was  chosen 
instead  of  a  point  near  the  coast,  is  a  good  indication  that  Rip- 
perda's  desire  to  maintain  an  influence  among  these  northeastern 
tribes  and  Ybarbo's  desire  to  return  to  the  neighborhood  which  he 
had  left,  together  outweighed  Ripperda's  fear  of  the  English  from 
the  south. 

The  above  reasons  given  by  Ripperda  for  the  choice  of  Paso 
Tomas  as  the  site  for  the  new  settlement  all  sound  unselfish  and 
patriotic  enough.  Other  persons  thought,  however,  that  the  selec- 
tion was  determined  by  the  governor's  and  Ybarbo's  personal  in- 
terest in  the  forbidden  Indian  trade.  Ripperda  had  for  some  time 
been  suspected  of  encouraging,  if  not  of  direct  complicity  with, 

*Diary  of  Luis  Cazorla,  in  Expediente  sobre  proposiciones,  71-72.  At 
this  rancheria  Cazorla  was  told  that  when  an  Englishman  had  come  there 
to  trade,  "giving  four  balls  for  a  deer  skin,"  French  soldiers  from  Nat- 
chitoches  had  arrested  him  and  taken  him  to  their  post  (Ibid).  For  a 
report  of  the  finding,  in  1778,  of  remains  of  foreign  vessels  on  the  coast, 
see  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono  .  .  .  y  establacer  Comercio,  3.  For 
another  report  of  English  on  the  coast,  see  below,  page  118,  and  Expediente 
sobre  la  dolosa  y  fingida  paz,  165-7. 

2The  place  which  I  have  designated  as  the  probable  site  of  Paso  Tomas 
corresponds  very  closely  with  the  one  indicated  by  Bancroft  (North  Mexi- 
can States  and  Texas,  I,  612)  as  the  site  of  San  Augustin  de  Ahumada 
before  the  removals  which  finally  placed  it  at  Orcoquisac. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.  1Q3 

French  smuggling.1  He  was  well  known  to  favor  its  continuance 
rather  than  leave  the  Indians  unsupplied  with  what  they  desired  or 
to  run  the  risk  of  having  it  furnished  by  the  English,  for  he  had 
distinctly  said  so.2  In  spite  of  numerous  orders  from  the  viceroy 
and  repeated  promises  from  Ripperda  that  the  French  traders 
should  be  driven  from  the  province,3  it  was  patent  that  they  still 
frequented  or  lived  among  most  of  the  tribes  of  East  Texas. 
Their  presence  there  is  proved  by  evidence  from  all  sources — the 
testimony  of  the  padres,  of  Cazorla,  Oconor,  Medina,  Ybarbo, 
Mezieres,  and  of  the  governor  himself.  Though  the  viceroy's 
orders  that  they  should  be  expelled  were  answered  with  promises  of 
compliance,  local  protests  Ripperda  met,  if  not  with  threats,  with 
the  opinion  that  it  was  not  time  to  stop  the  trade.4  Suspicion  of 
Ripperda  was  increased,  by  the  fact  that  his  principal  representa- 
tive among  the  Indians,  Mezieres,  had  the  reputation  of  being  a 
veteran  Indian  trader,1  while  the  most  prominent  of  the  French 

1Father  Josef  Abad,  missionary  at  Bahta,  who  went  with  Mezi£res  in 
1771  to  make  the  treaties  with  the  northern  Indians,  in  reporting  the 
"scandalous  trade"  that  lir  witnessed  on  the  frontier,  said,  "I  thought  (I 
do  not  know  for  certain)  that  the  governor  was  implicated  in  the  trade, 
through  his  communication  with  de  Mecieres"  (Report  to  the  viceroy, 
July  15,  1774,  in  Expediente  sobre  la  dolosa  y  fingida  paz,  149-150). 

2See  pp.  91-92. 

sln  communications  dated  IVci'mU-r  !)  and  December  19,  1772,  and  Jan- 
uary 6,  March  5,  May  25,  and  June  30,  1773,  the  viceroy  issued  orders  to 
the  governor  to  cut  off  this  trade.  Ripperda  as  frequently  promised  that 
the  commands  should  be  complied  with  (See  a  letter  from  the  viceroy  to 
Ripperda,  April  23,  1774,  in  Expediente  sobre  la  dolosa  y  fingida  paz, 
138.  Some  of  these  orders  are  in  Doc.  1,  Vol.  LI,  Secci6n  de  Historia, 
Archivo  General). 

*When  Father  Abad,  in  1771,  asked  permission  to  go  to  the  governor  of 
Louisian  to  report  the  contraband  trade  that  he  had  seen,  Ripperda  re- 
plied, according  to  Abad,  that  "an  immediate  prevention  of  the  trade 
would  be  undesirable"  (Abad  to  the  viceroy,  July  15,  1774,  in  Expediente 
sobre  la  dolosa  y  fingida  paz,  149-150).  Cazorla  complained  that  any  one 
who  remonstrated  with  Ripperda  about  the  contraband  trade  was  threat- 
ened with  arrest.  See  also  the  charge  made  by  Medina,  below,  p.  104. 

"Father  Abad  said  that  it  was  "notorious"  that  MeziSres  was  one  of 
the  principal  promoters  of  the  French  trade  with  the  Indians  (Letter  to 
the  viceroy,  July  15,  1774,  in  Expediente  sobre  la  dolosa  y  fingida  paz, 
150).  Raphael  Pacheco,  lieutenant  at  Bexar,  wrote  on  April  20,  1774, 


104  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

merchants,  Nicolas  de  la  Mathe,  stood  in  high  favor  with  the  gov- 
ernor. 

Ripperda  was  charged  even  with  sheltering  contraband  traders 
in  Bexar.  Don  Roque  Medina,  one  of  Oconor's  assistant  inspectors, 
who  was  in  that  place  early  in  1774  inquiring  into  Ripperda's  ad- 
ministration, reported  that  some  Frenchmen  were  there  under 
various  pretexts,  but  apparently  engaged  in  trade.  "These,"  he 
added,  "are  not  the  only  ones  who  have  come  to  the  interior  of  this 
province  with  the  Indians.  There  have  been  various  others,  who 
have  stopped  at  the  house  of  the  governor  and  then  returned  to  the 
northern  nations,  serving  as  couriers  to  fetch  and  carry  letters 
[to  and]  from  Natchitoches. 

"The  French  continue  to  trade  in  guns,  powder,  and  balls,  which 
they  exchange  for  ...  beasts  of  burden.  They  do  not  raise 
horses  and  mules,  hence,  in  order  to  supply  the  need,  it  is  necessary 
to  obtain  them  from  the  Indians  in  trade.  To  supply  these  it  is  the 
custom  for  the  Indians  to  come  and  rob  our  lands,  as  in  fact  they 
are  now  doing.  Indeed  they  have  no  other  occupation.  They  never 
enter  this  presidio  as  friends,  without  carrying  off  horses  and  mules 
when  they  depart,  and  there  is  no  human  being  who  can  control 
this  governor,  or  make  him  believe  that  they  [the  thieves]  are  the 
northern  tribes.  Any  one  who  says  so  is  imprisoned.  Only  a 
serious  measure  can  remedy  this  situation."1  Medina  no  doubt 
got  his  information  in  part  from  the  citizens  of  Bexar,  who  as  a 
rule  were  just  then  hostile  to  Ripperda,  but  his  statement  is  a 
good  sample  of  the  general  feeling  in  regard  to  the  governor's  rela- 
tions with  the  French  and  the  northern  Indians.2  Ripperda  main- 
tained, of  course,  that  all  these  charges  were  gross  calumnies;  but 

that  Mezi£res  was  a  person  "who  had  always  lived  among  the  said  nations, 
since  the  time  of  Dn.  Jacinto  de  Barrios,  trading  in  guns  and  ammuni- 
tion" (IUd.,  133). 

H)conor  to  the  viceroy,  May  13,  1774,  in  Expediente  sobre  la  dolosa  y 
fingida  paz,  141;  Medina  to  Oconor,  March  8,  1774,  Ibid.,  129. 

2Upon  receiving  Medina's  report  through  Oconor,  the  viceroy  severely 
reprimanded  Ripperda  for  not  having  put  a  stop  to  the  French  trade  and 
for  being  deceived  by  the  Indians  of  the  north,  and  forbade  him  hence- 
forth to  allow  a  single  Frenchman  in  Texas  or  even  to  communicate  with 
Mezieres  (The  viceroy  to  Ripperda,  May  8,  1774). 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.  1Q5 

the  case  against  him,  taking  into  consideration  the  great  accumula- 
tion of  testimony,,  seems  to  be  a  strong  one.1 

Added  to  these  grounds  for  distrust  were  Ybarbo's  previous  rec- 
ord on  the  frontier  and  the  fact  that  the  Vidais  Indians,  who  lived 
near  Paso  Tomas,  were  the  chief  intermediaries  between  the  French 
and  the  Apaches  in  the  trade  in  fire-arms.2  It  is  not  surprising, 
therefore,  that  evil  motives  were  attributed  to  Ripperda  and 
Ybarbo  in  the  selection  of  a  site  for  the  Adaesans. 

As  soon  as  Oconor  gave  the  governor's  choice  any  attention,  he 
reported  what  he  knew  of  Ybarbo's  previous  career  and  of  smug- 
gling at  Adaes  before  its  abandonment,  and  proceeded  to  say  that 
the  Adaesans  had  been  located  by  Ripperda  in  "the  place  which 
better  than  any  other  enables  them  to  engage  in  illicit  trade  and 
to  encourage  the  northern  Indians  in  stealing  droves  of  horses 
from  the  presidios  of  San  Antonio  de  Be  jar,  Bahia  del  Espiritu 
Santo,  and  even  as  far  as  Laredo,  as  lately  has  been  done.  More- 
over, the  Trinity  River  facilitates  navigation  to  the  Opelusas  and 
the  neighborhood  of  New  Orleans  itself.  Hence,  it  is  concluded 
that  the  citizens  established  on  the  Trinity  have  better  facilities 
than  formerly  for  their  contraband  trade/'3  That  Cazorla  and 
others  made  similar  charges  will  appear  later. 

In  concluding  this  subject  one  comment  may  be  made.  For 
Ripperda  to  have  been  tolerant  with  French  traders  would  have 
been  quite  consistent  with  his  desire  to  keep  on  good  terms  with 
the  Indians,  to  say  nothing  of  any  desire  for  private  gain,  consider- 
ing, on  the  one  hand,  the  great  influence  of  the  French  over  the 
Indians,  and,  on  the  other,  the  insistent  demand  of  the  Indians 
that  French  traders  be  allowed  to  go  to  them.  Moreover,  the  com- 

aRipperdft  to  the  viceroy,  June  24,  1774,  in  Expediente  sobre  la  dolosa 
y  fingida  paz,  163. 

'See  the  Informe  of  Mezieres,  July  4,  1772,  in  Expediente  sobre  pro- 
posiciones,  40-41.  Mezieres  therein  says,  "I  have  not  included  the  Bidais 
tribe  among  our  friends,  because  the  peace  which  they  have  made  with 
the  Apaches  seems  to  be  sufficient  reason  to  consider  them  as  quasi- 
enemies,  and  because  it  is  notorious  that  they  continue  supplying  these 
Apaches  with  fire-arms  and  munitions  in  exchange  for  mules  and  horses, 
well  known  to  be  stolen." 

'Oconor  to  the  viceroy,  December  31,  1775.  Quaderno  que  Corresponde, 
41-42. 


106  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

plaint  that  Ripperda's  administration  was  marked  by  French  in- 
fluence was  well  founded.  Hence,  if  all  these  charges  made 
against  him  were  true,  the  only  matters  for  surprise  would  be  that 
he  so  persistently  denied  them,  and  that  Ybarbo,  while  on  the 
Trinity,  seems  to  have  made  some  show  of  cutting  off  illicit  trade. 
>4  3.  The  removal  to  Bucareli.  —  Preparations  for  removal  of  the 
Adaesans  to  the  Trinity  were  made  in  August,  1774.  Before  leav- 
ing Bexar  the  emigrants  chose1  for  their  prospective  settlement 
the  name  of  Nuestra  Senora  del  Pilar  de  Bucareli,  thus  perpetuat- 
ing the  memory  of  their  former  home,2  and  at  the  same  time  in- 
voking the  patronage  of  the  viceroy,  Antonio  Maria  de  Bucareli  y 
Ursua.  The  governor,  in  view  of  'the  distance  of  Paso  Tomas  from 
any  settlement  and  of  the  fact  that  the  new  pueblo  was  to  have 
no  regular  garrison,  organized  from  their  number  a  company  of 
fifty  militia,  and  named  officers  "for  greater  stimulation  among 
them/'  Gil  Ybarbo  was  made  captain  of  the  company  and  justicia 
mayor3  of  the  prospective  pueblo,  since  he  was,  as  Ripperda  said, 
"the  best  fitted  and  the  most  acceptable  to  his  compatriots."  Gil 
Flores  was  appointed  lieutenant  and  Juan  de  la  Mora  alferez. 
These  appointments  were  made  subject  to  the  viceroy's  approval.4 
Of  guns  and  ammunition  most  of  these  "militia"  had  none,  but  the 
governor  interceded  with  the  viceroy  to  have  this  lack  supplied, 
asking  at  the  same  time  that  a  parish  priest  might  be  provided  for 
ten  years  at  government  expense.5 


to  the  viceroy,  September  1,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corre- 
sponde,  35.  Ybarbo  said  that  he  was  made  captain  on  August  7  (Letter 
to  the  viceroy,  March  22,  1791,  Bexar  Archives). 

2Pilar  de  los  Adaes. 

'Bancroft  is  apparently  wrong  in  calling  Ybarbo  alcalde  of  Bucareli 
(  see  his  North  Mexican  States  and  Texas,  I,  656  )  . 

*There  is  some  evidence  that  the  appointment  of  Ybarbo  was  approved 
on  January  1,  1775,  although  it  is  not  certain.  An  official  statement 
dated  at  B6xar,  January  17,  1784,  says  that  Ybarbo  began  exercising  the 
office  of  lieutenant  governor  of  the  pueblo  of  Nuestra  Seuora  del  Pilar  de 
Bucareli  on  the  date  named.  Since,  however,  this  is  not  the  title  which 
he  was  given  by  Ripperda,  and  by  which  he  was  known  —  namely,  captain 
of  militia  and  justicia  mayor  of  the  pueblo  —  it  seems  probable  that  the 
statement  referred  to  is  unreliable. 

5Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  September  1,  1774,  and  November  15,  1774,  in 
Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  34-36. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.  1Q7 

Because  of  the  poverty  of  the  Adaesans,  only  a  part  of  the 
families,  including  at  the  most  not  more  than  seventy  full-grown 
men/  could  get  together  an  outfit  for  the  exodus,  and  even  these 
had  to  be  aided  by  the  missions  with  a  supply  of  corn.  Nearly 
all  the  rest,  however,  declared  their  intention  to  follow  as  soon 
as  they  could  manage  to  get  horses  and  a  site  should  be  selected. 

Before  September  1  the  start  for  Paso  Tomas  was  made,2  the 
party  being  conducted  by  lieutenant  Simon  de  Arocha  and  four 
soldiers,  who  were  charged  with  the  duty  of  founding  the  new 
pueblo.1 

Thus  the  little  band  of  ignorant,  poverty-stricken  colonists  had 
been  able,  through  the  aid  of  the  governor,  the  vacillation  of  the 
viceroy,  the  delays  of  Oconor,  and  the  personal  force  of  their  leader, 
Ybarbo,  to  circumvent  the  royal  policy.  They  were  now  starting 
upon  the  first  stage  of  a  journey  that  was,  when  finished,  to  signal- 
ize a  complete  victory  over  the  home  government,  and  to  take  them 
back  to  the  neighborhood  of  the  place  which  they  had  been  so  re- 
luctant to  leave  a  year  before. 

4.  The  growth  of  the  settlement. — As  soon  as  the  emigrants 
reached  Paso  Tomas,  Ybarbo  took  the  lead  in  forming  the  material 
beginnings  of  a  settlement.  Of  his  energy  and  efficiency  as  head 
of  the  community,  Ripperda  always  gave  good  report,  which  was 
sustained  by  his  successor,  Domingo  Cabello,  and  by  the  religious 
who  were  put  in  charge  of  the  spiritual  affairs  at  Bucareli.  Rip- 
perda reported  that  Ybarbo  set  the  citizens  a  worthy  example  of 
thrift,  aided  them  with  his  own  tools,  oxen,  and  mules,  gave  them 
good  advice,  and  kept  them  in  due  subjection. 

'On  September  1  Ripperda  wrote  that  only  a  few  families  had  been  able 
to  go,  yet  there  were  enough,  it  seems,  to  form  a  company  of  fifty  militia. 
On  November  15  he  wrote  that  Pilar  de  Bucareli  had  seventy  men  capable 
of  bearing  arms.  There  is  some  indication  that  others  besides  the  first 
emigrants  had  gone  by  that  time,  hence  I  conclude  that  the  first  party  in- 
cluded less  than  seventy  adult  men  (Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  34-36). 
Ybarbo  stated  that  a  "large  portion"  of  the  Adaesans  remained  at  Be"xar 
(Expediente  Sobre  .  .  .  Parroco,  2). 

'This  was  the  date  upon  which  the  governor  reported  the  departure. 
Ripperda  said,  several  years  after,  that  the  settlement  was  begun  in 
August  (Letter  to  Croix,  April  27,  1777,  in  Documentos  para  la  Historia 
.  .  .  de  Texas,  XXVIII,  223). 

'Expediente  sob  re  el  abandono,  16. 


108  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

Soon  after  arriving  at  the  Trinity  Ybarbo  brought  from  Adaes 
the  nails  and  other  iron  work  of  the  houses  that  had  been  left 
there,  powder,  shot,  six  cracked  cannons,  and  some  gun  carriage 
iron,  to  be  utilized  in  the  buildings  and  for  the  defense  of  the  new 
pueblo.  There  were  also  brought  to  Bucareli  two  cannons  from  the 
deserted  presidio  at  Orcoquisac  and  two  that  had  been  left  at  the 
Taovayas  village  by  Colonel  Parilla  in  his  flight  before  the  Indians 
in  1759.1 

In  the  buildings  erected  at  Bucareli  apparently  neither  stone 
nor  adobe  was  used.  The  town  was  laid  out  with  a  plaza,  with 
the  houses  surrounding  it,  as  required  by  law.  The  cannons 
Ybarbo  had  mended  and  mounted,  and  round  the  place  he  built  a 
wooden  stockade.2  The  first  church  structure  was  a  "decent 
chapel,"  built  by  the  settlers  shortly  after  their  arrival,  although 
at  that  time  they  had  no  minister.  This  chapel  was  soon  replaced 
by  a  mere  pretentious  church  supplied  by  Nicolas  de  la  Mathe,  the 
French  trader  with  whom  Ybarbo  had  so  long  sustained  relations,3 
and  who  was  not  tardy  in  visiting  the  new  settlement  and  establish- 
ing himself  in  its  good  will.  The  motive  assigned  to  La  Mathe 
by  the  governor  for  this  benevolence  was  extreme  piety  and  spe- 
cial fondness  for  the  patron  saint  of  the  pueblo,  the  Lady  of  Pilar. 
Be  the  truth  as  it  may,  early  in  1776  he  sent  to  Bucareli  two  car- 
penters, who  built  a  wooden  church  twenty-five  varas  long,  the_ 

^ee  a  statement  in  the  B6xar  Archives  concerning  the  whereabouts  in 
1792  of  the  soldiers  and  the  cannon  that  had  been  at  Los  Adaes. 

One  of  the  terms  of  the  treaty  made  in  1771  between  the  Taovayases 
and  the  Spaniards  was  that  the  latter  should  be  allowed  to  remove  the 
cannons  (Expediente  sobre  proposiciones,  4).  In  1772,  when  Mezi£res 
was  at  the  Ovedsitas  villlage  on  the  upper  Brazos,  he  organized  a  party 
to  send  for  them,  but  later  gave  up  the  plan  (Ibid.,  34).  The  cannons 
were  very  probably  brought  to  Bucareli  by  MeziSres  about  May  1,  1778. 
In  April  of  that  year  he  made  a  visit  to  the  Taovayases  village,  while 
there  he  expressed  his  intention  to  remove  them,  and  on  his  return  he 
went  direct  to  Bucareli  (MeziSres  to  Croix,  May  2,  1778,  in  Documentos 
para  la  Historia  .  .  .  de  Texas,  XXVIII,  280,  283-284). 

2Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  January  25,  1776,  in  Quaderno  que  Corre- 
sponde,  69-70;  Botello  to  Cabello,  December  23,  1778,  in  Expediente  sobre 
el  abandono,  2-3. 

'See  page  84. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    109 

timber  used  being  brought  from  the  forest  by  the  inhabitants.1 
When  the  removal  had  been  made  from  Adaes  the  ornaments  of  the 
mission  had  been  placed  in  charge  of  the  governor.  Some  of  them 
were  taken  to  Bucareli  early  in  1775,  and  Ybarbo  later  on  asked 
for  the  rest,  but  part  of  them,  at  least,  remained  in  the  governor's 
hands  until  after  Bucareli  had  passed  out  of  existence.2 

Something  more  than  a  year  after  its  beginning,  Ripperda  was 
able  to  report  that  Bucareli  contained,  besides  numerous  jacales, 
twenty  houses  of  hewn  wood,  grouped  round  the  plaza,  a  wooden 
church,  and  a  guard-house  and  stocks,  the  last  two  items  having 
been  provided  at  the  personal  expense  of  Ybarbo.  And  in  June, 
1777,  Ybarbo  reported  that  there  were  at  the  place  more  than  fifty 
houses  of  hewn  wood,  corrals,  fields,  roads  cut  open,  and  an  im- 
proved river  crossing.8 

The  little  settlement  grew  slowly  in  numbers  by  the  addition  of 
various  odds  and  ends  of  humanity.  Ybarbo  brought  some,  but 
I  suspect  not  all,  of  the  people  who  had  been  left  at  El  Lobanillo 
and  Nacogdoches;  some  of  the  Adaesans  who  had  remained  at 
Bexar  followed,  as  they  had  intended;  an  occasional  slave,  escaped 
from  Louisiana,  drifted  into  the  place;  though  Ripperda  professed 
to  allow  no  citizens  other  than  Adaesans  to  go  to  Bucareli,  he  made 
exceptions  in  case  of  "useless  vagabonds"  who  might  be  at  Bexar; 
and  finally,  French  traders  flocked  into  Bucareli  from  Louisiana. 
During  the  winter  of  1776-7  the  pueblo  was  visited  by  an  epidemic 
that  made  an  inroad  into  its  population  by  causing  the  death  of 
seventeen  persons.  Among  these,  apparently,  was  lieutenant  Gil 
Flores.  At  the  same  time  the  near-by  Vidais  Indian  tribe  was 

1  Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  November  15,  1775,  in  Expediente  sobre  .  .  . 
Parroco,  3;  Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  January  25,  1776,  in  Quaderno  que 
Corresponde,  69;  Ripperda  to  Croix,  October  28,  1777,  and  Ybarbo  to  Rip- 
perda, June  30,  1777,  both  in  Representacion  del  Justicia,  2-3. 

'Ybarbo  to  Ripperda,  November  23,  1775,  and  to  the  viceroy,  January 
15,  1776,  in  Expediente  sobre  .  .  .  Parroco,  3-4;  Croix  to  Cabello, 
January  5,  1780,  in  the  Bexar  Archives. 

'Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  January  25,  1776,  in  Quaderno  que  Corre- 
sponde,  69-70;  Ybarbo  to  Ripperda,  June  30,  1777,  in  Representacion  del 
Justicia,  2. 


110  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

reduced  by  nearly  one-half  of  its  entire  number.1  What  the  nature 
of  the  malady  was  I  do  not  know,  but  it  was  attributed  to  the  ex- 
cessive amount  of  water  in  the  river  valley.  Before  this  epidemic 
there  were  in  Bucareli,  according  to  report,  99  "vecinos"  or,  as  I 
understand  the  term,  adult  male  residents.2  A  census  taken  some 
time  in  1777  showed  the  population  of  the  place  to  consist  of  three 
hundred  forty-seven  persons — one  hundred  twenty-five  men,  eighty- 
nine  women,  one  hundred  twenty-eight  children,  and  five  slaves.8 
Round  about  lived  the  Vidais  and  other  Indian  bands.  Small 
though  it  was,  this  was  a  growth  that  compared  very  favorably 
with  that  of  the  Spanish  settlements  that  had  grown  up  in  Texas 
less  irregularly  and  more  under  the  paternal  care  of  the  govern- 
ment. 

5.  Economic  conditions. — Bucareli  was  granted  the  usual  favor 
accorded  to  new  pueblos  of  exemption  for  ten  years  from  all  forms 
of  royal  taxation.4  As  we  have  seen,  one  of  the  special  advantages 
at  first  claimed  for  the  place  was  its  agricultural  possibilities.  True 
to  the  traditions  of  Mexican  farming,  Ripperda  had  instructed 
Arocha  to  choose  for  the  pueblo  a  site  affording  irrigation  facilities. 
The  location  selected  failing  in  these,  which  were  little  needed,  as 
the  event  proved,5  the  settlers  sowed  their  first  grain  east  of  the 
Trinity,  where  there  were  some  permanent  lagoons.  This  crop  was 
spoiled  by  a  flood.  The  second  summer  they  succeeded  in  raising 
a  crop  of  corn  west  of  the  river,  in  a  place  pointed  out 
by  the  Vidais  Indians.  Thereafter  a  number  of  families  settled 
on  ranchos,  or  farms,  in  this  direction  some  distance  from  the 

^ezieres  to  Croix,  March  18,  1778,  in  Expedient*  sobre  el  abandono, 
2;  Ripperda  to  Croix,  October  30,  1777,  in  Expediente  sobre  .  .  .  Par- 
roco,  12. 

2Ripperda  to  Croix,  January  11,  1778,  in  los  Vecinos,  etc.,  7. 

'Ripperda   to  the  viceroy,   January   25,    1776,   in   Quaderno  que  Corre- 

sponde,  67-70;   Ybarbo  to  the  viceroy,  November  25,   1775,  in  Expediente 

sobre  .  .  .  Parroco,  2;  Cabello  to  Croix,  May  31,  1779,  Expediente 
sobre  el  abandono,  16. 

4Representacion   del   Justicia,  6. 

"Ybarbo  told  Mezieres  that  good  irrigation  could  be  had  at  a  distance 
of  twelve  leagues  (Mezieres  to  Croix,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono 
.  .  .  y  establacer  Comercio,  2 ) . 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    HI 

pueblo.  Here  they  raised  at  least  one  good  crop  of  wheat  before 
the  settlement  was  abandoned. 

Hoping  to  enable  the  place  to  supply  its  own  blankets  and  coarse 
cloth,  Ybarbo  took  from  Bexar  cotton  seed,  sheep,  and  a  negro 
weaver,  who  was  expected  to  teach  his  craft  to  the  settlers.  With 
a  Bexar  merchant,  one  Dn.  Juan  Ysurrieta,  Ybarbo  made  a  con- 
tract to  have  Bucareli  furnished  with  merchandise  in  exchange  for 
the  prospective  agricultural  products  of  the  place.  Ripperda  pro- 
fessed to  hope  that  Bucareli  would  in  time  prove  especially  pro- 
ductive of  horses,  cattle,  small  stock,  tallow,  soap,  corn,  wheat,  and 
rice,  and  that  it  would  not  only  furnish  the  presidios  of  Bexar 
and  Bahia  with  horses,  but  also  put  an  end  to  the  frontier  smug- 
gling by  furnishing  the  Indians  with  a  substitute  for  French 
goods.  Mezieres,  who  visited  Bucareli  in  March,  1778,  reported 
that  the  place  was  well  capable  of  becoming  the  basis  of  a  rich 
trade  with  New  Orleans,  by  way  of  the  Trinity  River  and  Opel- 
ousas,  if  such  a  boon  should  be  allowed  by  the  government.1 

Such  dreams  as  these  could  have  come  true  only  on  condition 
that  the  settlement  had  enjoyed  a  longer  existence,  that  its  popula- 
tion had  been  intelligent  and  enterprising,  and  that  the  govern- 
ment had  changed  its  blind  policy  of  discouraging  the  trade  best 
calculated  to  induce  the  colonists  to  effort.  As  it  was,  the  set- 
tlers were  poor  and  shiftless,  and  during  their  short  stay  there 
they  eked  out  an  existence  not  far  above  that  of  their  Indian 
neighbors,  supplementing  the  scanty  products  of  their  fields  and 
herds  by  hunting  the  buffalo  and  wild  cattle  that  abounded  between 
the  Trinity  and  the  Brazos.2  From  the  testimony  in  the  docu- 
ments we  are  led  to  think  that  they  spent  a  large  part  of  their 
time  in  this  pursuit.  As  the  French  who  traded  among  the  In- 
dians in  the  vicinity  were  interested  in  fur  dealing  as  well  as  in 


to  the  viceroy,  January  25,  1776,  in  Quaderno  que  Oorre- 
sponde,  69-71  ;Botello  to  Cabello,  December  23,  1778,  in  Expediente  sobre 
el  abandono,  2;  Mezifcres  to  Croix,  March  18,  1778,  in  Expediente  sobre 
el  abandono  .  .  .  y  establacer  Comercio,  2. 

'Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  2,  8;  Representacion  del  Justicia,  7,  9; 
Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  67-70. 

They  depended  for  supplies  in  part  on  the  Tawakana  Indians  who  lived 
on  the  Brazos  near  Waco  (MezieTes  to  Croix,  April  5,  1778,  in  Documentos 
para  la  Historia  .  .  .  de  Texas,  XXVIII,  274). 


112  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly 

procuring  horses,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  Spanish  col- 
onists who  engaged  in  hunting  took  advantage  of  the  market  for 
their  peltries,  exchanging  them  for  the  goods  in  which  the  French 
dealt.  Of  course,  all  trade  between  them  and  the  French  was  con- 
traband, for  the  Spanish  government  strictly  forbade  trade  with 
Louisiana  in  any  form. 

6.  Spiritual  affairs. — Notwithstanding  due  efforts  on  the  part 
of  Ybarbo  and  the  governor  to  secure  a  priest  for  Bucareli,  there 
seemed  to  be  some  danger  of  the  realization  of  the  prophecy  made 
by  the  padres  of  the  mission  at  Bahia  that  the  place  would  become 
a  resort  famed  for  "liberty  of  conscience"  and  "an  asylum  for 
apostates."1  The  little  flock  went  to  their  new  pasture  unaccom- 
panied by  a  shepherd,  and  for  more  than  two  years  remained  with- 
out one.  During  that  time  they  enjoyed  no  other  spiritual  aid 
than  that  afforded  by  two  short  visits  made  by  some  religious  from 
Bexar. 

It  has  been  seen  that  when  the  Adaesans  first  requested  permis- 
sion to  return  to  Los  Ais  they  asked  also  that  a  minister  might  be 
provided  for  them  ten  years  at  government  expense.2  As  soon  as 
they  left  Bexar  Eipperda  repeated  the  request,  and  asked  of  the 
bishop  of  Gruadalaxara,  to  whose  jurisdiction  Bexar  now  belonged, 
that  the  settlers  be  allowed  to  build  a  church.  The  latter  petition 
was  promptly  granted.3  In  February,  1775,  temporary  spiritual 
aid  was  furnished  by  the  chaplain  of  the  presidio  at  Bexar,  who 
went  to  Bucareli,  placed  in  the  chapel  which  the  settlers  had  built 
the  image  of  the  patron  saint,  the  Lady  of  Pilar,  and  performed 
religious  offices.  A  year  later  two  missionaries  from  San  Antonio 
spent  a  few  days  at  Bucareli.4  Who  they  were  I  have  not  learned, 

*Cazorla  wrote  to  the  viceroy  that  the  padres  at  the  Bahia  mission 
anticipated  "the  loss N of  many  souls"  at  Bucareli.  "Many  wish  to  go  to 
that  settlement,"  he  said,  "because  it  is  notorious  that  in  it  the  Indians 
keep  peace  for  the  sake  of  the  barter  or  trade  which  is  carried  on  with 
them,  as  well  as  because  they  live  there,  as  it  is  understood,  with  liberty 
of  conscience"  (Letter  .of  May  15,  1775,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  38). 

2See  page  90. 

3Ripperd{i  to  the  viceroy,  September  1,  1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corre- 
sponde, 34;  the  bishop  of  Guadalaxara  to  Ripperda,  December  19,  1775, 
in  the  B&xar  Archives. 

*Ybarbo  to  the  viceroy,  November  25,  1775,  and  Arrellano  to  Croix, 
April  27,  1777,  both  in  Expediente  sobre  .  .  .  Parroco,  2,  8.  The 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.     113 

but  there  is  some  indication  that  one  of  them  was  FT.  Josef  Fran- 
cisco Mariano  de  la  Garza,  a  Franciscian  friar  from  mission  San 
Antonio  de  Valero,  who  eventually  became  regularly  installed  at 
Bucareli.1 

Before  this  time  Ybarbo  had  again  addressed  the  viceroy  on  the 
subject  of  a  regular  pastor  supported  by  the  government,  and  again 
Kipperda  had  seconded  the  request.  In  response,  the  viceroy,  on 
the  advice  of  Oconor,  wrote  Kipperda,  in  August,  1776,  that,  since 
there  were  already  ten  religious  on  royal  pay  at  the  five  missions 
near  by,  as  a  temporary  measure  the  governor  should  require  the 
president  of  the  missions  to  send  one  of  them  to  Bucareli  until 
the  disposal  of  that  place  should  be  decided.  Kipperda  served  the 

bishop  of  Guadalaxara  to  Ripperda,  December  13,  1775,  in  the  Bexar 
Archives;  Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  January  25,  1776,  in  Quaderno  que 
Corresponde,  69. 

Ybarbo  to  the  viceroy,  November  25,  1775;  Ripperda  to  the  viceroy, 
January  15,  1776;  Oconor  to  the  viceroy,  June  15,  1776;  opinion  of  the 
fiscal,  August  8,  1776 — all  in  Expediente  sobre  .  .  .  Parroco,  3-5; 
the  viceroy  to  Ripperda,  August  21,  1776,  in  the  B£xar  Archives.  The 
viceroy  carelessly  took  Oconor's  statement  that  there  were  five  missions 
near  the  presidio  of  San  Antonio  to  mean  that  they  were  near  Bucareli. 
Arrellano  caught  him  up  on  this  point,  as  the  text  below  shows.  Arrel- 
lano  said  that  he  promptly  sent  to  Bucareli  a  padre,  whose  name  he  did 
not  mention,  and  asked  him  to  have  him  relieved.  Croix  (June  24,  1777) 
recommended  relieving  him,  without  mentioning  his  name;  and  Ripperda 
(August  30,  1777)  mentioned  Garza  as  the  padre  at  Bucareli  whom  he 
had  seen  fit  to  relieve.  As  no  other  religious  is  mentioned  in  this  con- 
nection, and  as  Garza's  presence  at  Bucareli  from  this  time  on  can  be 
established,  I  conclude  that  he  was  the  one  sent  in  consequence  of  Rip- 
perda's  order  of  September  27,  1776  (see  Expediente  sobre  .  .  .  Par- 
roco, 12;  Representacion  del  Justicia,  4;  and  Expediente  sobre  el  aban- 
dono,  14,  38).  Garza  stated  in  his  deposition  made  at  Zacatecas  in  No- 
vember, 1787  (see  note  5,  page  84),  that  he  had  known  and  dealt  with 
Gil  Ybarbo  "almost  without  intermission,  except  for  a  few  days,"  from 
February,  1776,  to  September,  1783.  This  would  indicate  that  he  was, 
perhaps,  one  of  the  two  missionaries  sent  to  Bucareli  in  the  spring  of 
1776.  But  it  seems  that  these  missionaries  returned  in  a  short  time,  and 
that  during  the  summer  of  1776  the  place  was  without  a  spiritual  ad- 
viser. Hence  his  statement  is  puzzling.  It  appears  that  Ybarbo  was  in 
B£xar  in  February,  1776.  This  might  account  for  the  beginning  of  their 
acquaintance  at  this  time,  without  supposing  Garza  to  have  been  in 
Bucareli.  In  either  case,  I  can  not  explain  Garza's  almost  continuous 
dealings  with  Ybarbo  after  February,  1776. 


114  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

order  on  September  27,  and  the  president,  Fr.  Pedro  Ramirez 
de  Arrellano,  "promptly"  complied  by  sending  Father  Garza,  men- 
tioned above. 

It  now  became  a  question  whether  Garza  should  remain  at  Bu- 
careli  or  be  relieved  by  one  of  the  presidial  chaplains  of  Bahia  or 
Bexar.  Though  the  president  had  obeyed,  he  resented  the  loss  of 
his  missionary,  and  ere  long  he  appealed  to  Caballero  de  Croix,  who 
was  now  comandante  general  of  the  Internal  Provinces.  To  him 
he  wrote  that  the  viceroy's  order  was  obviously  based  on  an  error, 
namely,  the  supposition  that  Bucareli  was  near  the  missions,  when 
in  fact  it  was  one  hundred  forty  leagues  away;  that,  since  one  mis- 
sionary must  always  be  present  at  each  mission  to  minister  to  the 
neophytes,  if  one  were  sent  to  Bucareli  there  would  be  no  one  to  go 
into  the  forests  to  bring  back  absconded  apostates  or  to  seek  new 
converts;  and  that,  since  the  stipend  of  the  padres  was  often  the 
sole  support  of  these  Indians,  they  might  suffer  if  one  of  the  mis- 
sionaries were  removed.  He  concluded  by  suggesting  that,  since 
the  bishop  of  Gaudalaxara  had  entertained  such  a  plan,  one  of  the 
presidial  chaplains  should  be  sent  occasionally  to  Bucareli — as  had 
been  done  in  the  spring  of  1775 — and  the  missionary  fathers  re- 
quired to  take  his  place  while  absent.1 

Croix  now  yielded  conditionally,  and  ordered  the  governor  to 
relieve  Garza  by  sending  one  of  the  presidial  chaplains,  unless  he 
had  good  reasons  for  not  doing  so.  But  Ripperda,  instead  of  re- 
lieving Garza,  wrote  to  Croix  that  the  objections  to  doing  so  were 
strong;  that  the  presidios  would  suffer  more  than  the  missions  by 
the  absence  of  their  ministers;  and  finally,  that  he  was  hoping  to 
establish  a  mission  at  Bucareli,  in  which  case  the  services  of  a 
trained  missionary  would  be  indispensable.  In  this  tilt  with  the 
president  of  the  missions,  the  governor  apparently  won,  for  Garza 
remained  the  minister  in  charge  at  Bucareli  to  the  end  of  its  his- 
tory.2 

If  we  may  judge  of  Garza's  personality  from  his  subsequent  pre- 
ferment, we  would  conclude  that  Bucareli  was  fortunate  in  secur- 

^rrellano  to  Croix,  April  27,  1777,  in  Expediente  sobre  .  .  .  Par- 
roco,  6-9. 

^Croix  to  Ripperda,  June  24,  1777;  Croix  to  Arrellano,  June  25,  1777, 
and  Ripperda  to  Croix,  August  30,  1777 — all  in  Expediente  sobre  .  .  . 
Parroco,  9-11. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    115 

ing  for  its  pastor  a  man  of  more  than  ordinary  ability.  After 
leaving  Nacogdoches  (in  1783),  whither  he  went  from  Bucareli, 
he  became  president  of  the  missions  of  the  province  of  Texas,  and 
later  was  reader  in  sacred  theology,  then  assistant  in  the  council 
(discreto)  of  the  Franciscan  College  at  Zacatecas.1 

A  short  time  before  Bucareli  was  abandoned  another  missionary, 
Fr.  Juan  Garcia  Botello,  was  there.  When  or  under  what  circum- 
stances he  went  I  have  not  been  able  to  determine.2 

Having  secured  a  minister  at  government  expense,  Bucareli  next 
applied  for  exemption  from  church  tithes.  In  the  summer  of  1777 
it  was  announced  in  the  church  that  tithes  would  be  collected,  and 
two  years'  dues  were  gathered ;  but  Ybarbo  made  this  the  occasion 
of  appealing,  in  the  name  of  the  citizens,  to  Ripperda,  asking  relief 
from  this  burden,  on  the  ground  of  the  poverty  and  misfortunes 
of  the  community,  and  of  the  public  services  which  it  had  rendered. 
The  petition  was  passed  by  the  governor,  with  his  approval,  to 
Croix,  who  referred  it  to  Pedro  Galindo  Navarro,  the  assessor  of 
the  commandancy  general.  Navarro  recommended  granting  the 
request  on  two  grounds,  first,  because  Bucareli  was  exempt  from  all 
civil  dues,1  and  second,  because,  since  tithes  were  intended  for  the 
support  of  ministers  of  the  altar,  and  since  no  religious  of  this 
class  was  serving  there,  the  tithes  could  not  legally  be  collected. 
Acting  on  this  advice,  Croix  requested  the  church  authorities  at 
Guadalaxara  to  exempt  Bucareli  for  ten  years,  which  request  was 
soon  granted.3 

It  has  been  seen  that  Ripperda  informed  Croix  in  August,  1777, 
that  he  had  hoped  to  establish  a  mission  at  Bucareli.4  This  was 

'Testimony  of  Garza,  November  14,  1787;  Schmidt  (Rev.  Edmond,  J. 
P.),  A  Catalogue  of  Franciscan  Missionaries  in  Texas,  1528-1859  (Aus- 
tin, 1901),  10-11. 

2In  his  letter  of  August  30,  1777,  Ripperda  seems  to  say  that  Arrellano 
had  been  forced  to  send  a  secojid  padre  to  Bucareli,  although  his  meaning 
is  not  clear.  This  may  have  referred  to  Botello's  going  (Expediente  Sobre 
.  .  .  Parroco,  10.  See  also  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  72). 

•Croix  presented  the  request  to  the  bishop,  the  dean,  and  the  cabildo  of 
the  church  of  Guadalaxara,  by  way  of  command  and  entreaty  (ruego  y 
encargo).  -For  the  facts  involved  in  this  paragraph,  see  Representacion 
del  Justicia,  passim. 

4See  page  114. 


116  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

not  the  first  indication  that  he  entertained  such  a  plan.  It  was 
clearly  his  desire  from  the  first  to  gather  around  Bucareli  as  many 
Indian  tribes  as  possible.  His  mission  projects,  however,  seem 
to  have  looked  primarily  to  collecting  there  the  apostate  Indians 
who  had  in  times  past  deserted  the  various  missions  of  the  province 
— a  prospect  which  he  knew  could  not  lack  attractiveness  to  persons 
who  had  had  experience  with  mission  Indians.  In  January,  1776, 
he  informed  the  viceroy  that  one  purpose  of  sending  the  two  mis- 
sionaries just  then  about  to  depart  for  Bucareli  was  to  minister 
to  the  neighboring  Gentiles  and  to  found  a  mission  to  attract 
apostates,  and  his  subsequent  requests  for  a  minister  for  Bucareli 
were  based  in  part  upon  this  ground. 

Often  Eipperda  wrote  hopefully  about  prospects  for  the  fulfill- 
ment of  his  desires  in  this  particular.  Now  he  reported  that  many 
of  the  Indians  living  near  Bucareli  were  being  baptized  and  that 
the  Kanrankawas  were  beginning  to  come  to  the  pueblo  to  live; 
now  that  there  were  good  indications  that  many  apostates  from  the 
old  mission  of  San  Xavier  would  gather  there;  and  again,  that  the 
Texas,  Quitseis,  and  Tonkawas  were  in  the  habit  of  coming  for 
presents;  that  the  Mayeses  had  failed  to  settle  near  the  place  only 
through  groundlessly  having  taken  offence  with  the  Spanish;  that 
he  hoped,  by  gentle  means,  to  retain  the  friendship  of  the  Tawa- 
kanas  with  whom  lived  the  desired  apostate  Xaranames;  and  that 
the  Orcoquisacs,  who  had  years  before  deserted  their  mission,  were 
likely  to  come  to  settle  near  Bucareli,  since  they  were  imploring 
Ybarbo  for  a  mission  and  were  sending  presents  to  Father  Garza. 
In  spite  of  these  hopeful  expressions,  however, — which,  doubtless, 
were  as  strong  as  the  facts  would  justify, — nothing  came  of  the 
plan  for  a  mission  at  Bucareli  except  the  baptism  of  numerous 
Vidais  and  a  few  other  Indians,  and  the  restoration  of  some  of  the 
Xaranames  to  Bahia,  unless,  perhaps,  it  is  this  plan  that  explains 
the  presence  of  Botello  at  Bucareli  in  the  fall  of  1778. 1 

7.  Ybarbo  among  the  Indians  and  his  search  for  the  English. — 
Ybarbo's  activities  were  by  no  means  confined  to  establishing  the 
pueblo  of  Bucareli  and  administering  its  internal  affairs.  He 

Eipperda  to  the  viceroy,  January  25,  1776,  in  Quaderno  que  Corre- 
sponde,  69,  71;  to  Croix,  August  30,  1777,  in  Expediente  sobre  .  .  . 
Parroco,  11-12;  and  to  Croix,  October  28,  1777,  in  Representation  del 
Justicia,  4. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    117 

was  equally  active,  as  Ripperda  had  predicted  that  he  would 
be,  in  promoting  good  relations  with  the  Indians  and  in  watching 
the  coast.  Indeed,  it  was  at  Bucareli  that  Ybarbo  received  his 
best  training  for  a  more  conspicuous  career  later  on.  His  life  at 
Adaes  and  El  Lobanillo  had  given  him  some  knowledge  of  In- 
dian character,  and  now,  by  his  four  years  in  a  position  of  responsi- 
bility, and  at  the  same  time  of  semi-independence,  at  Bucareli,  he  so 
extended  his  acquaintance  with  the  natives  and  his  knowledge  of  In- 
dian affairs  that  he  became  very  influential  among  the  tribes  of 
East  Texas. 

During  these  four  years,  he  made — according  to  his  own  state- 
ment— in  addition  to  hostile  campaigns  against  the  Comanches, 
no  less  than  three  friendly  tours  among  the  northern  Indians  and 
as  many  to  the  coast  for  the  double  purpose  of  conducting  Indian 
relations  and  looking  for  Englishmen.1  The  governor  ordered 
Lieutenant  Arocha,  when  he  founded  Bucareli,  to  go  with  Ybarbo 
to  invite  the  Vidais,  Texas,  Quitseis,  Yscanes,  and,  if  possible,  the 
more  distant  tribes,  to  come  and  live  near  the  new  establishment. 
Before  Arocha  returned  to  Bexar  he  and  Ybarbo  were  able,  through 
lack  of  horses,  to  visit  only  the  Texas  and  the  Vidais.2  But  later, 
through  friendly  visits,  presents,  and  other  inducements,  Ybarbo 
gradually  attracted  various  bands  to  the  vicinity  of  Bucareli  to 
live  or  to  trade  and  receive  presents.  In  March,  1778,  he 
went  with  Mezieres  and  made  a  treaty  with  the  Tonkawas,  one  of 
the  conditions  of  which  was  that  this  tribe  should  regularly  be 
visited  by  a  trader.3  On  the  same  expedition  he,  Garza,  and 
Mezieres  persuaded  part  of  the  Xaranames  living  among  the  Tawa- 
kanas  to  return  to  their  mission  at  Bahia.4 

The  most  noteworthy  of  these  expeditions  was  that  made  in  1777 
to  the  mouth  of  the  Sabine  River.  In  the  summer  of  that  year  a 
trader  stationed  among  the  Orcoquisac  Indians  reported  to  Ybarbo 

1Ybarbo  to  Ripperda,  June  30,  1777,  in  Representation  del  Justicia,  2. 

'Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  November  15,   1774,  in  Quaderno  que  Corre- 
sponde,  36. 

•Ybarbo   to   Cabello,   December    7,    1778,    in   Expediente    sobre.  el   aban- 
dono,  5. 

4MeziSres  to  Croix,  April  5,  7,  and  8,  1778,  in  Documentos  para  la  His- 
toria     .     .     .     de  Texas,  XXVIII,  273-278. 


118  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

that  in  the  mouth  of  the  Neches  River  there  was  a  stranded  Eng- 
lish vessel  laden  with  bricks ;  that  the  bricks  had  been  given  to  the 
Opelousas  and  the  Atakapas  Indians  near  by;  and  that  there  was 
another  vessel  in  the  mouth  of  the  Trinity.  Ybarbo  at  once  got  to- 
gether thirty  men  and  started  for  the  coast,  going  first  to  the  Orco- 
quisac  town.  The  Indians  here  told  him  that  the  English  had  en- 
tered the  Neches  with  small  vessels  to  trade  with  the  natives;  that 
in  the  summer  of  1774  they  had  remained  long  enough  to  sow  a 
crop;  and  that  the  vessel  now  lying  in  the  Neches  had  arrived  in 
the  previous  May  (1777),  had  missed  the  channel,  and  stranded, 
the  occupants  withdrawing,  but  promising  to  return.  Ybarbo 
scolded  the  Indians  for  not  reporting  the  matter  promptly,  and 
then,  with  ten  men  and  two  paid  Indian  guides,  he  reconnoitered 
the  coast.  He  passed  eastward  along  the  shore  and  came  upon  the 
vessel,  apparently  in  Sabine  Lake.  It  still  contained  some  bricks, 
but  nothing  else.  Such  other  things  as  had  been  on  board  were 
seen  in  the  possession  of  the  near-by  Atakapas.  These  Indians  told 
Ybarbo  that  the  English  had  left  three  men  to  guard  the  vessel 
until  the  main  party  should  return,  but  nothing  was  seen  of  them 
by  the  Spaniards. 

Ybarbo  next  returned  to  reconnoiter  the  mouth  of  the  Trinity, 
but  he  did  not  find  the  vessel  reported  to  have  been  there.  Near 
the  shore  some  distance  farther  west,  however,  he  found  an  Eng- 
lishman, lost  and  nearly  naked.  Ybarbo  understood  him  to  say 
that  his  name  was  Bautista  Miler,  that  he  had  come  from  Jamaica 
bound  for  the  Mississippi  with  a  Captain  named  Jose  David,  who 
in  order  to  rob  him  of  some  coffee,  whiskey,  and  five  negroes,  had 
cast  him  adrift  in  a  canoe,  and  that  he  had  been  lost  for  seven 
months. 

This  story  told  by  Miler  gives  no  further  hint  as  to  who  the  Eng- 
lish were  that  the  Spaniards  had  been  hearing  of  and  dreading  in 
the  direction  of  the  coast. 

Before  returning  to  Bucareli,  Ybarbo  made  a  map  of  the  coast 
from  Sabine  Pass  to  a  point  some  distance  west  of  the  Trinity 
River.  The  sketch  has  historical  value,  particularly  as  it  helps 
us  to  locate  with  some  accuracy  the  old  Spanish  presidio  of  Orco- 
quisac.1  After  an  absence  of  twenty-two  days,  Ybarbo  returned 
with  Miler  in  custody,  and  reported  his  exploit  to  Croix. 

*It  is  in  volume  LI,  Secci6n  de  Historia,  Archive  General. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.     119 

Wishing  to  ascertain  the  truth  about  the  other  English  vessel, 
Ripperda  dispatched  a  second  expedition,  composed  of  fifty  men, 
including  Ybarbo  and  thirty  of  his  militia,  to  reconnoiter  the 
coast  from  where  Ybarbo  had  left  off  to  the  Colorado.  The  party 
set  out  from  Bucareli  July  11,  1777,  but  what  it  accomplished  does 
not  appear.1 

8.  Contraband  trade,  and  the  question  of  suppressing  Bucareli. 
— To  what  extent  the  establishment  of  Bucareli  actually  increased 
or  decreased  smuggling  in  its  vicinity  it  is  hard  to  determine.  It 
had  previously  existed  among  the  Indians  thereabout  and  it  con- 
tinued to  flourish,  but  the  exact  part  taken  in  it  by  Ybarbo  and  his 
colonists  is  a  difficult  matter  to  decide,  for  the  evidence  is  con- 
flicting. If  we  were  to  accept,  unquestioned,  the  reports  of  Ybarbo 
and  Ripperda  we  would  conclude  that  the  latter  made  special  ef- 
forts to  prevent  it.  But,  though  there  is  some  evidence  that  this 
was  the  case,  there  are  also  indications  pointing  the  other  way. 

Ybarbo  found  French  traders  from  Adaes  and  Natchitoches 
among  the  Vidais  Indians  when  he  first  went  to  establish  Bucareli. 
Some  of  them,  whose  Spanish  wives  went  to  live  at  Bucareli,  ap- 
plied for  residence  there,  which,  according  to  Ripperda,  was  granted 
only  upon  condition  of  their  giving  up  Indian  trade.2  Bucareli 
had  scarcely  been  founded  when  La  Mathe,  apparently  king  of  the 
Indian  traders,  arrived  at  the  place,  with  a  pass  from  the  governor 
authorizing  him  to  "collect  some  debts" — a  subterfuge,  more  than 
likely,  to  enable  him  to  continue  his  traffic.3  As  we  have  seen,  he 
put  himself  into  the  good  graces  of  the  community  by  building  a 
church  for  it,  but  one  is  inclined  to  be  skeptical  when  told  that  he 
did  this  through  extreme  piety  alone,  particularly  when  informed 
by  one  of  Ybarbo's  admirers  that  La  Mathe  and  Ybarbo  kept  up 

1(The  story  given  here  is  based  on  Ripperda's  letter  to  Croix,  dated 
August  30,  1777,  acompanying  which  is  the  map  referred  to.  I  have  not 
seen  Ybarbo's  original  report  to  the  governor.  Navarro's  report  to 
Croix,  dated  June  8,  1779,  has  aided  me  in  reading  Ripperda's  letter  (see 
Expedieute  sobre  .  .  .  Parroco,  13-19). 

2Ripperd£  to  the  viceroy,  January  25,  1776,  in  Quaderno  que  Corre- 
eponde,  67. 

'See  page  84. 


120  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

former  relations  during  the  whole  existence  of  Bucareli,  buying 
and  selling  of  each  other,  just  as  before.1 

A  few  instances  of  actual  smuggling  at  Bucareli  came  to  light, 
and,  we  may  assume  that,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  for  each  one 
that  was  reported  numerous  others  escaped  notice.  The  reports 
of  these  cases  suggest  much  more  than  they  actually  say  in  regard 
to  what  was  going  on.  In  the  spring  of  1775  some  men  from 
Bahia,  who  had  been  across  the  Guadalupe  River,  met  a  party  of 
Bexar  men  coming  from  Bucareli  with  French  tobacco  in  their  pos- 
session, some  of  which  the  men  from/  Bahia  obtained.  The  Bexar 
men  reported  that  the  article  was  plentiful  at  Bucareli,  whither 
it  was  being  brought  by  Frenchmen,  who  also  traded  with 
the  Indians,  The  matter  reaching  the  ears  of  Captain  Cazorla,  he, 
by  strategy,  verified  the  report,  identified  one  of  the  culprits  at 
Bexar,  and  notified  Ripperda.  The  governor  replied  that  he 
had  ascertained  that  the  amount  of  tobacco  smuggled  had  been 
small.  Cazorla  afterwards  intimated,  however,  that  the  governor 
may  not  have  taken  "due  pains"  to  find  out.  Cazorla  reported  the 
affair  to  the  viceroy,  with  the  comment  that  "it  appears  that  the 
sole  motive  of  the  subjects  who  go  to  Bucareli  to  live  is  to  smuggle 
and  to  be  free  from  the  yoke  of  justice."  He  added  that,  since 
so  many  were  desirous  of  going  to  that  place  where  license  reigned, 
and  where  the  Indians  were  more  friendly  than  elsewhere,  there 
was  danger  of  depopulating  and  weakening  the  defenses  of  the  other 
settlements.2 

Not  long  after  this  Ybarbo  seized  contraband  goods  from  one 
Marcos  Vidal,  of  Bexar,  who  was  on  the  way  from  Natchitoches. 
Vidal  was  sent  in  custody  to  Bexar,  was  convicted  of  smuggling 
and  imprisoned,  but  escaped.  These  two  cases  show  that  the  Span- 
iards as  well  as  the  French  and  Indians  engaged  in  the  forbidden 
trade.3 

On  another  occasion  Ybarbo  confiscated  a  large  quantity  of 
merchandise  from  Augustin  de  Grevenverge,4  captain  of  militia 

1See  Garza's  deposition  of  November  14,  1787,  in  the  B6xar  Archives. 
2Cazorla  to  the  viceroy,  May  14,  1775,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  37. 

'Ripperda  to  the  viceroy,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  68.     A  report 
of  the  case  is  in  Bexar  Archives. 

'Variously  spelled  in  the  documents. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    121 

at  Atakapas,  in  Louisiana,  who  was  on  his  way  to  Bexar  to  trade 
for  horses  and  mules,  ignorant,  he  claimed,  of  the  law  forbidding 
trade  between  the  provinces.  How  this  could  be  when  these  pro- 
hibitions were  so  oft  repeated  is  a  matter  to  cause  wonder,  but  when 
the  trifling  affair  finally  reached  clear  to  the  royal  throne  this  ex- 
cuse was  accepted  by  His  Majesty.1 

Cazorla's  report  to  the  viceroy  established  at  once  in  Mexico  a 
bad  reputation  for  Bucareli,  and  set  on  foot  an  attempt  to  remove 
it  from  the  frontier.  On  the  advice  of  Areche,2  Kipper  da  was  in- 
structed, in  July,  1775,  to  report  upon  the  reputed  disorders  at 
Bucareli,  and,  if  necessary,  without  further  notice  to  remove  its 
inhabitants  nearer  to  the  center  of  the  province.3  Cazorla  was 
complimented  for  his  vigilance  and  enjoined  to  continue  it,  while 
Oconor,  to  whom  was  sent  a  copy  of  Cazorla's  letter,  was  requested 
to  hurry  up  and  decide  the  final  disposition  to  be  made  of  the 
Adaesans.  He  was  even  to  send  them  to  Los  Ais  if  he  saw  fit,  the 
royal  order  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.4  Oconor  did  not  reply 
until  December  31,  but  on  that  date  he  expressed  to  the  viceroy 
the  strongest  condemnation  of  Bucareli;  repeated  the  objections 
that  he  had  made  to  allowing  Adaesans  to  go  to  Los  Ais ;  indulged 
in  more  or  less  "I  told  you  so" ;  gave  Ybarbo  a  bad  name ;  and  de- 
clared his  disappointment  that  the  governor  should  establish  the 
settlers  in  the  very  place  best  calculated  to  cause  trouble.  To  per- 
mit them  to  remain,  he  said,  was  certain  to  have  evil  consequences. 
He  recommended,  therefore,  that  the  matter  be  taken  out  of  Kip- 
perda's  hands  and  put  into  Cazorla's,  giving  him  authority  to  dis- 
tribute the  Bucareli  settlers  at  B6xar,  Bahia,  and  Arroyo  del 

'In  Expediente  sobre  comercio  reciproco  entre  las  Provincias  de  la 
Luisiana  y  Texas,  4-6  (Vol.  43,  Secci6n  de  Historia,  Archive  General),  is 
a  copy  of  the  memorandum  of  the  goods  confiscated  by  Ybarbo. 

'Areche  to  the  viceroy,  July  13,  1775,  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde, 
38-39.  Areche  said  in  his  note,  "It  appears  that  this  settlement  presents 
some  dangers  that,  lest  they  increase,  ought  to  be  remedied,  and  at  the 
opportune  moment  cut  off  at  the  roots." 

The  viceroy  to  Ripperda,  July  26,  1775,  in  the  Be"xar  Archives. 

4Areche  to  the  viceroy,  July  13,  1775,  and  Cazorla  to  the  viceroy,  Feb- 
ruary 27,  1776,  both  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  39,  65;  Oconor  to  the 
viceroy,  December  31,  1775,  Ibid.,  40-54.  The  date  of  the  order  to  Oconor 
was  July  26,  1775. 


122  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

Cibolo  as  the  royal  order  'had  required.1  On  hearing  from  Oconor, 
the  government  again,  in  February,  1776,  referred  the  matter  to 
him,  and  decided  that  no  further  step  should  be  taken  in  Mexico 
until  Ripperda  should  be  heard  from.  His  report,  when  it  came,2 
containing  only  contradictory  testimony,  the  government  concluded 
to  try  to  get  at  the  truth  of  the  situation  by  having  the  president 
of  the  Texas  missions  make  a  report  based  on  the  testimony  of  the 
religious  at  Bucareli.  Oconor,  not  to  be  outdone  in  the  matter  of 
procrastination,  decided,  in  April,  to  suspend  action  until  he  could 
go  in  person  to  Bexar,  and,  in  conference  with  the  cdbildo,  con- 
sider the  whole  matter.  This,  he  said,  was  the  only  way  to  avoid 
the  endless  importunities  which  "some  persons  might  make,  with 
the  sole  purpose  of  succeeding  in  their  caprice  of  not  obeying  the 
viceroy's  and  his  [Oconor's]  repeated  orders."3  Thus,  so  far  as 
any  immediate  action  on  the  part  of  Oconor  or  the  viceroy  was  con- 
cerned, the  French,  Spaniards,  and  Indians  on  the  frontier  were 
left  free  to  carry  on  illicit  trade  at  will.  But  Ripperda  consistently 
denied  that  it  was  openly  allowed  by  the  Texas  authorities.  Al- 
though he  admitted  that  it  existed,  he  claimed  that  Ybarbo  was 
active  in  trying  to  prevent  it,  that  the  citizens  of  Bucareli  were 
law-abiding,  and  that  positive  public  advantages  would  be  realized 
by  fostering  the  settlement  which  was  under  such  general  suspi- 
cion.4 He  defended  the  place  to  the  last.  Shortly  before  he  re- 
tired from  the  office  of  governor  he  urged  that  it  be  reinforced  by 
sending  to  it  the  Adaesans  still  remaining  in  Bexar,  instead  of 
trying  to  form  of  them  a  new  pueblo  at  Bexar,  Arroyo  del  Cibolo, 
or  on  the  Guadalupe  or  the  San  Marcos  River,  as  was  then  being 
talked  of.6 

Had  Oconor  remained  in  power,  it  is  not  at  all  improbable  that 

1Oconor   to   the   viceroy,   December   31,    1775,   in    Quaderno   que   Corre- 
sponde,  40-45. 

*It  was  dated  January  25,  1776. 

'Areche  to  the  viceroy,  February  21,  1776,  and  May  2,  1776;  Oconor  to 
the  viceroy,  April  5}  1776 — all  in  Quaderno  que  Corresponde,  54,  72,  66. 

*Ripperda   to  the  viceroy,   January   25,    1775,   in   Quaderno   que   Corre- 
sponde, 67-71. 

5Ripperda  to  Croix,  January   11,   1778,   in  Los  Vecinos,  etc.,   7.     Croix 
was  at  this  time  in  B6xar. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    123 

as  soon  as  his  hands  had  become  really  free  he  would  have  carried 
out  the  royal  order  to  the  letter  and  suppressed  the  place.  But 
Bucareli  now  profited  by  another  year's  delay  due  to  Oconor's  pre- 
occupation, and  then  by  a  change  in  the  government.  Early  in 
It 77  the  affairs  of  the  Internal  Provinces  were  put  into  the  hands 
of  a  comandante  general,  independent  of  the  viceroy.  The  person 
appointed  to  this  office  was  Caballero  de  Croix.  The  mere  change 
of  administration  gave  Bucareli  an  additional  term  of  grace,  and, 
of  more  importance,  it  transferred  the  supervision  of  the  interests 
of  Texas  from  Oconor,  the  main  opponent  of  Bucareli,  to  Croix, 
who  was  not  only  opposed  to  the  royal  policy  of  withdrawing  from 
East  Texas,1  but  who  also  enjoyed  a  high  degree  of  independence  in 
his  office. 

It  was  more  than  a  year  after  Croix  took  charge  of  affairs  be- 
fore he  reopened  the  question  of  Bucareli's  continuance  or  sup- 
pression. Then,  in  July,  1778,  he  ordered  that  Domingo  Cabello 
should  be  requested  to  report,  as  soon  as  he  should  take  charge  of 
the  office  of  governor  of  Texas,  upon  the  advantages  and  disadvan- 
tages of  Bucareli.2  But  before  Cabello  replied  the  fate  of  Bucareli 
had  been  decided  independently  of  governmental  authority. 

VI.      THE   COMANCHE   RAID   ON   BUCARELI   AND   THE   BEGINNINGS  OF 
MODERN  NACOGDOCHES. 

1.  The  Comanche  troubles  at  Bucareli,  May  and  October, 
1778. — One  of  the  advantages  that  had  been  claimed  for  Bucareli 
was  that  it  was  protected  by  the  powerful  Tonkawas8  and  Tawa- 

K)n  May  18,  1779,  he  wrote  to  Mezieres  stating  that  Texas  was,  of  all 
the  Spanish  provinces,  one  of  those  most  worthy  of  attention,  because  of 
its  size,  fertility,  good  climate,  and  location  (Mezieres  to  Croix,  October 
7,  1779,  reviewing  the  letter  to  Croix  referred  to,  in  Expdeiente  sobre  el 
abandono  .  .  .  y  establecer  Comercio,  7-8).  In  1778  he  tried  hard  to 
secure  permission  to  open  up  trade  between  the  provinces  of  Texas  and 
Louisiana  (Expediente  sobre  Comercio  Reciproco). 

*Croix  to  Navarre,  July  24,  1778,  in  Representacion  del  Justicia,  7. 
Croix  to  Cabello,  July  30,  1778,  cited  in  Cabello  to  Croix,  May  31,  1779, 
in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  13. 

•The  Tonkawa  tribe  was  at  this  time  one  of  the  most  numerous  of  those 
in  Texas.  It  was  estimated  in  1778  that  it  comprised  300  warriors 
(Informe  del  Governador  de  Texas,  in  Vol.  64,  Provincias  Internas,  Archivo 
General). 


124  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

kanas  from  the  dreaded  Comanches.  And  this  claim  seems  to  have 
been  well  founded,  for  it  was  more  than  three  years  before  the 
peace  of  the  settlement  was  disturbed  by  the  Comanches'  unwel- 
come presence.  But  at  last  it  became  the  object  of  their  depreda- 
tions. 

One  day  in  May,  1778,  the  inhabitants  of  Bucareli  were  fright- 
ened half  out  of  their  wits  by  the  arrival  in  the  neighborhood  of 
about  thirty  warriors  of  this  tribe  led  by  the  son  of  the  head  chief, 
Evea.  Ybarbo  sallied  out  with  his  men,  however,  and  pursued 
the  Indians,  overtook  them  at  the  Brazos,  killed  three,  and  put  the 
rest  to  flight.  The  story  of  this  occurrence  rests  upon  the  testi- 
mony of  Ybarbo,  Garza,  Botello,  and  Mezieres,  who  agree  upon 
the  points  thus  far  stated.  But  as  to  the  object  of  the  Comanches' 
visit  to  the  pueblo  there  is  conflicting  testimony.  Ybarbo,  Garza, 
and  Botello  represented  the  occurrence  as  an  attack,  and  Garza 
even  claimed  that  the  Indians  stole  some  of  the  horses  of  the  set- 
tlers. Mezieres,  however,  who  happened  to  be  in  the  neighborhood 
at  the  time,  and  who  doubtless  got  his  information  from  the  Co- 
manches, told  and  professed  to  believe  a  different  story.  Accord- 
ing to  his  version,  the  Indians  were  on  the  way  to  make  a  friendly 
visit  to  himself,  had  camped  near  the  ranches  at  Bucareli,  had 
turned  their  horses  loose,  and  were  resting — anything  but  hostile 
actions — when  they  were  frightened  off  by  the  boisterous  commo- 
tion raised  by  the  terrified  Spaniards  in  their  haste  to  corral  their 
stock  and  raise  an  attacking  party.  When  he  heard  this  story 
from  Croix,  Governor  Cabello  flatly  rejected  it,  justly  I  suspect, 
on  the  ground  that  in  the  first  place  it  was  absu-rd  to  assume,  as 
did  Mezieres,  that  a  Comanche  would  approach  a  Spaniard  settle- 
ment with  friendly  intent,  and  secondly,  that  he  had  full  confidence 
in  the  testimony  of  the  three  eye-witnesses  of  the  event — particu- 
larly that  of  Botello,  whom  he  had  closely  questioned  on  the  mat- 
ter— and  that  all  of  them  had  represented  the  Comanche  visit  as  an 
attack.1 

*See  Botello  to  Cabello,  December  23,  1778;  Garza  to  Cabello,  January 
8,  1779;  Ybarbo  to  Cabello,  January  12  and  October  19,  1779;  Cabello  to 
Croix,  August  31,  1779 — all  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  2,  5,  7,  8,  17, 
38;  Mezieres  to  Croix,  November  15,  1778,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono 
.  .  .  y  establecer  Comercio,  4. 

Ybarbo   (letter  of  January  12)    reported  the  date  of  the  Comanche  visit 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    125 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  purpose  of  this  first  visit  of  the 
Comanches,  the  object  of  the  second  was  not  doubtful.  In  Octo- 
ber of  the  same  year,  Bucareli  was  raided  by  a  much  larger  party 
than  the  one  that  had  approached  before.  Driving  off  two  hun- 
dred seventy-six  horses,  mainly  the  property  of  Nicolas  de  la 
Mathe,  the  Comanches  crossed  the  Brazos.  Here,  at  the  point 
where  they  had  on  the  former  occasion  been  overtaken,  they  left 
an  ambush  to  cover  their  retreat.  The  Spaniards  apparently  fol- 
lowed, but  hearing  of  the  ambush,  gave  up  the  pursuit,  and  the 
Indians  escaped  with  their  rich  booty.1  Near  a  Taguayas  village 
they  left  the  stock  in  charge  of  seven  braves.  Soon  this  guard  was 
attacked  by  a  party  of  Quitseis  and  Texas,  both  of  which  tribes 
were  friendly  toward  the  Spanish.  In  the  fight  three  Comanches 
were  killed  and  the  horses  were  taken.  But  the  triumph  was  short, 
for  the  escaping  Comanches  returned  with  friends,  overtook  their 
enemies,  killed  three  Texas  warriors,  and  recovered  the  horses.2 

This  raid  on  the  Bucareli  ranches  was  followed  by  rumors  in  the 
settlement  that  something  worse  was  to  be  expected  at  the  hands  of 
the  Comanches.  Traces  were  found  indicating  that  Indian  spies 
had  effected  a  night  entrance  into  the  stockade  and  learned  the 
weakness  of  its  defence.  Rumors  were  brought  in  by  French 
traders  and  friendly  Jndians  now  to  the  effect  that  the  Indians 
were  planning  the  total  destruction  of  the  place  by  burning  the 
town,  killing  the  men,  and  carrying  off  the  women  and  children; 
now  that  traces  of  Comanches  had  been  seen  in  the  nighborhood  of 
Nabasat;  and  again  that  their  attack  was  delayed  only  to  secure 
the  alliance,  or  at  least  the  neutrality,  of  the  Vidais  and  other 
Indians  friendly  to  the  Spaniards.3 

Such  rumors  as  these  were  usually  very  disturbing  to  Spanish 

as  May  3  (tres).  According  to  Mezieres  (letter  cited  above)  it  was  after 
May  6.  This  leads  me  to  suspect  that  tres  in  my  copy  of  Ybarbo's  letter 
should  be  trese  (13). 

'See  references  cited  above,  note  1,  page  124.  The  different  accounts 
vary  somewhat  as  to  the  number  of  horses  stolen  on  this  occasion. 

2Ybarbo  to  Cabello,  December  7,  1778,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  aban- 
dono,  4. 

8Ybarbo  to  Cabello,  December  7,  1778,  and  January  12,  1779;  Botello  to 
Cabello,  December  23,  1778;  and  Garza  to  Cabello,  January  8,  1779 — all 
in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  2-6. 


126  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

settlements  stronger  and  less  isolated  than  Bucareli,  and  we  need 
not  be  surprised  that  they  terrorized  this  weak  village.  Ybarbo 
could  muster  only  a  handful  of  men,  and  these  poorly  equipped. 
The  cannons  were  useless  to  resist  a  surprise  attack.  The  houses 
were  of  wood  and  easily  combustible,  and  the  stockade  was  in  a 
bad  state  of  repair.  Ybarbo  feared,  moreover,  the  disaffection  of 
the  Tonkawas,  one  of  the  tribes  on  which  Bucareli  relied  for  pro- 
tection. In  the  March  preceding,  he  and  Mezieres  had  promised 
to  send  them  a  trader,  for  whom  they  had  asked.  But  the  promise 
had  not  been  kept,  and  the  Indians  were  complaining.  To  pacify 
them  Ybarbo  was  compelled  to  make  them  presents  at  his  own 
expense.1 

To  strengthen  the  means  of  defense,  Ybarbo  appealed  to  the 
governor  for  arms  and  ammunition,  but  without  practical  avail. 
Once  more  he  collected  a  handful  of  men  and  went  out  to  recon- 
noiter,  but,  after  one  day's  march,  upon  being  overtaken  by  a  mes- 
senger and  informed  that  a  large  party  of  Comanches  and  Tagua- 
yas  were  between  the  San  Xavier  and  the  Brazos,  on  the  way  to 
attack  the  Spaniards  and  the  Vidais,  he  turned  back.2 

Of  the  situation  in  Bucareli,  Father  Garza,  who  was  there,  now 
wrote :  "These  miserable  inhabitants  are  left  in  such  a  deplorable 
state  that  they  have  no  way  even  to  hunt  for  food  ...  for 
they  can  not  go  out  to  hunt  except  in  large  numbers  and  well 
armed,  nor  yet  can  they  go  out  together  and  with  their  weapons, 
lest  they  should  leave  the  settlement  helpless.  .  .  .  Hence 
they  can  follow  no  other  occupation  than  to  be  continually  on 
guard  of  the  horses  and  the  settlement,  relieving  each  other  morn- 
ing and  night.  The  time  left  free  from  this  fatiguing  work  they 
spend  in  witnessing  the  need  and  the  miseries  of  their  families, 
without  being  able  to  furnish  them  daily  food  by  the  ordinary 
work  of  hunting,  fishing,  or  other  similar  means,  and;  moreover, 
without  hope  of  remedy  in  the  future,  since  the  best  time  for  spw- 

1Ybarbo  to  Cabello,  December  7,  1778,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  aban- 
dono,  5. 

2This  event  happened  some  time  before  December  7,  1778,  when  Ybarbo 
reported  it  to  Cabello  (Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  4-5.  See  also  his: 
letter  of  January  12,  1779.  Hid.,  9.) 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    127 

ing   wheat  has   passed   without  a  grain  being  sown   up   to   the 
present."1 

2.  The  flight  from  Bucareli,  January-February,  1779. — The 
settlers  now  began  to  appeal  either  for  protection  or  for  permis- 
sion to  remove  to  the  neighborhood  of  the  Texas  villages  to  the 
eastward.2  It  is  a  matter  for  comment  that  they  did  not  request 
permission  to  go  to  Bexar,  where  the  defences  of  the  province 
were  strongest  and  where  the  king  had  ordered  that  they  should 
establish  themselves.,  but  that,  instead,  they  asked  to  be  allowed  to 
return  a  step  nearer  to  the  place  whence  they  had  been  removed  in 
1773.  Whether  the  suggestion  of  a  removal  came  from  Ybarbo 
or  from  some  one  else  I  can  not  say.  The  first  mention  of  such  a 
plan  in  the  correspondence  is  found  in  a  letter  written  in  Decem- 
ber,3 1778,  by  Father  Botello,  who  had  recently  returned  from 
Bucareli.  In  response  to  an  inquiry  made  by  Governor  Cabello 
about  the  condition  of  affairs  at  Bucareli,  Botello  said  that,  in  his 
opinion,  the  place  should  be  abandoned;  that,  besides  being  threat- 
ened with  destruction  by  the  Comanches,  it  was  incapable  of 
irrgation  and  had  proved  unhealthf ul  because  of  heavy  rains ;  that 
these  shortcomings  could  be  remedied  and  all  of  the  advantages  of 
Bucareli  with  respect  to  fertility  and  location4  secured  at  little 
additional  cost  by  establishing  the  settlers  "on  the  Neches  River 
among  the  pueblos  of  Texas,  on  the  Angelina  River  among  the 
pueblos  of  the  same  tribe,  with  even  greater  security  in  the  place 
where  the  mission  of  Nacogdoches  formerly  was,  with  much  more 
on  the  Atoyaque  River,  and  with  advantages  and  security  beyond 
comparison  at  the  site  of  the  mission  of  Los  Ais,  on  the  road  from 
Natchitoches,  thirty-nine  leagues  from  that  post."5  It  is  not  at  all 

*Garza  to  Cabello,  January  8,  1778,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  6. 

'Ybarbo  to  Cabello,  January  12,  and  January  27,  1779,  in  Expediente 
eobre  el  abandono,  8. 

'December  23. 

4The  advantages  of  Bucareli's  location  he  conceived  to  be  its  position 
midway  between  Natchitoches  and  Be"xar,  and  its  importance  as  a  place 
from  which  to  watch  the  coast  and  to  keep  up  friendly  relations  with  the 
Indians. 

"Botello  to  Cabello,  December  23,  1778,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  aban- 
dono, 2-6. 


128  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

unlikely  that  this  preference  of  Botello's  for  Los^Ais  was  simply 
his  reflection  of  the  desires  of  the  Adaesans,  learned  by  him  dur- 
ing his  residence  at  Bucareli. 

About  two  weeks  after  the  date  of  this  letter1  Ybarbo 
wrote  the  governor  that  the  people  had  twice  come  to  him 
in  a  body  begging  that  they  might  either  be  supplied  with  a  suit- 
able military  guard  or  be  allowed  to  go  with  their  families  to  the 
neighborhood  of  the  Texas  villages.  In  the  name  of  the  settlers, 
Ybarbo  forwarded  the  petition  to  the  governor.2  Cabello  replied 
that  he  could  not  send  men  and  arms  to  aid  the  place,  but  that  he 
could  furnish  ammunition  if  Ybarbo  would  come  after  it,  though 
he  dared  not  send  it  for  fear  that  it  would  fall  into  the  hands  of 
the  Indians.3 

But  before  help  was  received,  Ybarbo,  compelled,  as  he  claimed, 
by  the  straits  and  the  supplications  of  his  people,  granted  their 
request  to  be  allowed  to  remove  to  the  Texas  country.  On  Janu- 
ary 25  the  larger  part  of  the  families,  including  Ybarbo's  own, 
began  to  leave.  Two  days  later  Father  Garza  set  off  on  foot  with 
the  sick  and  the  church  treasures  in  his  care,  Ybarbo  remaining 
behind  with  twenty  men  to  protect  the  families  and  to  guard  the 
stock  and  goods  left  in  the  flight  until  the  owners  might  return 
for  them.4  Incident  to  the  departure  of  these  families,  either  by 
accident  or  design,  half  of  the  houses  of  the  place  were  destroyed 
by  fire.5 

Now  an  additional  reason  for  deserting  Bucareli  presented  itself 
in  the  form  of  a  flood.  On  the  night  of  February  14,  according 
to  the  story,  the  Trinity  River  overflowed  its  banks,  rose  to  half  the 
height  of  the  houses  of  the  pueblo,  and  drowned  part  of  the  re- 

xOn  January  8,  7779. 

2Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  9-10. 

'Cabello  to  Croix,  February  11,  1779,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  aban- 
dono, 11. 

4Ybarbo  to  Cabello,  January  27,  1779,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  aban- 
dono, 10. 

5This  fact  was  not  reported  by  Ybarbo,  but  Cabello  said  that  he  learned 
it  "extra judicially"  (Letter  to  Croix,  February  11,  1779,  in  Expediente 
sobre  el  abandono,  11). 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    129 

maining  stock.  The  women  and  children  and  some  of  the  stock 
were  saved  on  improvised  boats  and  rafts  and  removed  to  higher 
land  quite  a  distance  from  the  river.  Here  the  people  remained  a 
few  days,  when  they  were  again  molested  by  Comanches,  who,  after 
what  was  reported  to  be  an  all  night  siege,  ran  off  thirty-eight  head 
of  horses  that  had  been  saved  from  the  deluge,  and  then  killed, 
near-by,  half  a  dozen  Indians  friendly  to  the  Spanish.  After  this 
raid,  haste  was  made  to  remove  the  people  in  boats  to  the  east 
bank  of  the  river,  but  here  they  were  again  disturbed  by  the  In- 
dians.1 Being  now  thoroughly  frightened  by  the  Indians  and 
evicted  by  fire  and  flood,  Ybarbo  at  once  set  out  for  the  Texas 
country  with  the  remainder  of  the  settlers.2 

3.  The  beginnings  of  modern  Nacogdoches. — On  the  way  he  ap- 
parently picked  up  the  people  who  had  gone  on  before  and  who 
were  living  scattered  among  the  Indians.  The  journey  was  con- 
tinued toward  the  northeast  "until,"  to  use  the  words  of  Ybarbo 
in  his  report  to  Croix,  "there  were  seen  the  site  of  the  Texas  In- 
dians and,  three  leagues  beyond,  the  old  mission  of  Nacogdoches, 
where  there  was  a  small  chapel  in  which  the  reverend  father  may 
perform  the  holy  sacraments  and  a  house  where  he  may  live,3  as 
well  as  plenty  of  water,  lands,  and  materials  for  houses."  He  does 
not  mention  the  Old  Stone  Fort,1  which  it  has  been  supposed  had 

'Ybarbo  to  Croix,  May  13,  1779,  in  Expedients  sobre  el  abandono,  22; 
Cabello  to  Croix  August  31,  1779;  Ibid.,  37;  Garza  to  Croix,  April  30, 
1779,  Ibid.,  23. 

'When  the  settlers  left  Bucareli  they  left  six  cannons,  four  of  which 
were  sooner  or  later  taken  to  Nacogdoches.  Those  remaining  at  Bucareli 
were  ordered  sent  to  Bexar,  and  in  1793  steps  were  taken  to  remove  them 
thither,  but  that  they  ever  reached  there  I  can  not  say  (see  a  document 
entitled  "Provincia  de  Texas,  Ano  de  1792,"  and  a  letter  from  Revilla 
Gigedo  to  Governor  Mufioz,  April  10,  1793,  both  in  Bexar  Archives). 

•Mezieres,  in  his  letter  of  August  23,  1779,  testifies  to  the  fact  that  the 
mission  buildings  were  still  standing  when  the  Spaniards  returned.  He 
says  "It  [the  mission]  is  situated  at  the  foot  of  a  knoll,  where  its  build- 
ings still  remain"  (Expediente  sobre  el  abandono  .  .  .  y  establecer 
Comercio,  6 ) . 

*It  is  just  possible  that  one  of  the  buildings  mentioned  by  Ybarbo,  the 
chapel  or  the  house,  was  identical  with  what  has  been  known  as  the  Old 
Stone  Fort,  which  has  recently  been  torn  down,  but  this  is  improbable. 
I  can  not  assert  with  confidence  that  Ybarbo  did  not  build  the  Old  Stone 


130  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

been  built  there  before  this  time.1  "I  approached/'  he  continues, 
"in  Border  that  we  might  sow  grain  to  support  ourselves  and  to 
await  the  decision  of  your  Grace,  whom  I  humbly  beg  to  approve 
this  my  action,  since  it  is  impossible  to  return  to  the  same  place  or 
to  the  banks  [of  the  river]  below  or  above,  because  the  lands  are 
low,  or  farther  away  [from  the  river],  because  of  even  greater  risk. 
There  is  not  to  be  found  in  this  vicinity  another  place  better  than 
this  one  or  the  one  which  was  granted  to  us  by  his  Excellency,  the 
viceroy,2  and  this  one  facilitates  watching  the  movements  and 
operations  of  the  friendly  Indian  nations  and  keeping  in  touch 
with  the  doings  of  the  traders,  as  well  as  getting  news  from  the 
coast,  a  matter  with  which  I  am  charged  by  my  governor."8 

Unless  some  of  the  Bucareli  families  who  had  set  out  in  Jan- 
uary reached  Nacogdoches  in  advance  of  Ybarbo — and  it  would  ap- 
pear that  they  did  not — this  entry  of  Ybarbo's  into  the  abandoned 
mission  was  the  beginning  of  the  modern  city  of  Nacogdoches,  for 
the  continuous  existence  of  a  settlement  there  from  this  time  for- 
ward can  be  traced. 

There  would  be  some  satisfaction  in  being  able  to  give  the  exact 
date  when  this  event  took  place,  but  from  the  available  records  I 
am  unable  to  do  so.  The  best  that  I  can  do  is  to  say  it  was  cer- 
tainly as  early  as  April  30,  the  date  of  the  first  communication 
from  Nacogdoches  known  to  me.  On  that  day  Father  Garza  wrote 
from  there  to  Croix  recounting  the  story  of  the  Bucareli  flood, 
stating  that  Ybarbo  had  already  given  a  report  of  the  situation  at 
Nacogdoches,  and  using  terms  that  imply  that  all  or  nearly  all  of 

Fort  for  defense  against  the  Indians  soon  after  going  to  Nacogdoches,  as 
has  been  supposed  was  the  case.  Indeed,  in  one  communication  he  refers 
indefinitely  to  "fortifying"  the  place,  but  this  probably  meant  the  build- 
ing of  a  wooden  stockade.  A  strong  indication  that  the  Fort  had  not 
been  built  before  September  4,  1788,  is  the  testimony  of  Francisco  Xavier 
Fragoso  in  his  Derrotero  (see  page  69).  I^e  notes  that  at  Nacogdoches, 
where  he  arrived  on  that  date,  the  houses  were  of  wood  and  eighty  or 
ninety  in  number.  If  so  substantial  a  building  as  the  Old  Stone  Fort  had 
been  there,  he  in  all  probability  would  have  mentioned  it  as  a  noteworthy 
object. 

'See  The  American  Magazine  for  April,  1888,  pp.  721-728. 

'That  is,  Los  Ais   (see  page  96). 

"Ybarbo  to  Croix,  May  13,  1779,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  23. 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    131 

the  settlers  from  Bucareli  had  already  arrived.1  Ybarbo's  first 
report  of  his  arrival  at  Nacogdoches  I  have  not  been  able  to  find. 
The  earliest  communication  of  his  from  there  that  I  have  seen 
is  dated  May  9.  It  is  a  letter  to  Governor  Cabello,  and  contains 
language  implying  that  he  had  been  at  Nacogdoches  some  time  and 
that  Cabello  already  knew  about  the  removal  from  Bucareli.2  In 
reporting  to  Croix  on  May  13  the  story  of  the  desertion  of  Bucareli' 
he  says  that  more  than  a  hundred  days  were  spent  in  getting  to 
Nacogdoches.  To  have  been  true  this  could  not  have  referred  to 
the  party  he  conducted,  for  he  did  not  leave  Bucareli  till  some  days 
after  February  14.  Neither  could  it  have  referred  to  the  whole 
party  led  by  Garza,  because  one  hundred  days  from  January  25, 
when  he  set  out,  was  May  5;  but,  as  we  have  seen,  some,  if  not 
most,  of  the  settlers  had  arrived  at  Nacogdoches  as  early  as  April 
30.  If  Ybarbo's  statement  was  true,  therefore,  he  probably  meant 
that  it  was  one  hundred  days  from  the  time  when  Garza  started 
before  all  the  stragglers  who  had  8^°fil^J^fr€r'fW^fCive(i  a^  the 
new  settlement. 

It  is  necessary  here  to  correct  an  error  that  crept  into  the  story 
of  the  abandonment  of  Bucareli  as  it  was  told  in  the  Spanish 
correspondence,  namely,  the  assertion  that  the  cause  of  leaving  the 
place  was  the  flood.  It  is  clear  from  the  above  account  that  the 
Comanche  raid  was  the  external  cause  of  the  removal  of  the  people 
to  the  east,  and  that  the  flood  did  not  occur  till  nearly  three  weeks 
after  most  of  them  had  left.  Yet,  through  an  increasing  emphasis 
of  what  was  in  reality  a  secondary  matter,  it  soon  became  current 
in  the  government  accounts  that  the  change  of  location  had  been 
primarily  due  to  the  overflow  of  the  Trinity.8 

^xpediente  sobre  el  abandono,  23-24. 
32-33. 


8It  is  true,  however,  that  a  previous  flood  had  destroyed  the  crops  at 
the  place,  and  that  the  recurrence  of  the  disaster  may  have  been  a  strong 
reason  for  not  returning  to  Bucareli  (Botello  to  Cabello,  December  23, 
1778,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  2-3).  Interesting  examples  of  the 
way  the  story  became  distorted  are  the  following:  "In  reviewing  Cabello's 
first  report  Croix  wrote,  "The  governor  of  the  province  of  Texas  says 
.  .  .  that  because  an  inundation  occurred  at  that  pueblo  and  the 
Comanches  stole  the  greater  part  of  their  horses,  they  were  so  frightened 
that  they  have  deserted  the  settlement"  (Croix  to  Cabello,  May  21,  1779, 


132  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

4.  Nacogdoches  recognized  by  the  government. — Since  it  is  not 
my  aim  to  pursue  the  history  of  East  Texas  beyond  the  founda- 
tion of  Nacogdoches,  it  only  remains  to  show  how  this  place,  set>- 
tied  without  authority,  secured  recognition  from  the  government, 
and  to  indicate  briefly  the  importance  it  soon  attained. 

The  main  purpose  of  Ybarbo  and  Garza  in  their  first  reports  to 
Croix  of  the  desertion  of  Bucareli  was  to  show  their  unwillingness 
to  return  thither,  and  to  secure  permission  to  remain  at  Nacog- 
doches. By  this  time  Ybarbo  had  changed  his  mind  as  to  the  rela- 
tive desirability  of  Los  Ais,  for  he  concluded  the  letter  of  May  13 
to  Croix  with  the  opinion  that  of  the  two  available  places  for  a 
settlement,  Los  Ais  and  Nacogdoches,  the  advantages  were  with  the 
latter.1  At  the  same  time  that  he  was  asking  Croix  for  permis- 

in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  12).  Croix's  assessor  general,  Navarro, 
in  reviewing  the  history  of  Bucareli  in  1780,  wrote  that  "the  flood  which 
the  river  caused,  and  the  fire  which  followed  it,  reduced  to  ashes  the 
buildings  that  had  been  made,  and  obliged  the  settlers  to  disperse  and 
seek  shelter  and  asylum  among  the  friendly  nations  near  by"  (Expediente 
sobre  el  abandono  y  establecer  Comercio,  45-46). 

xWith  respect  to  returning  to  Bucareli  Garza  had  written  two  weeks 
before  (Letter  to  Croix,  April  30,  1779,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono, 
23-24)  :  "It  is  now  wholly  impossible  to  restore  this  population  to  the 
same  unprotected  place  whence  they  fled,  without  exposing  them  to  greater 
and  more  evident  perils  than  those  which  they  have  already  experienced, 
because — not  to  mention  this  hostility  [of  the  Comanches],  which  was  the 
cause  of  their  flight  and  which  may  be  greater  in  the  future, — that  dis- 
trict 'has  been  proved  uninhabitable  by  the  inundation  which  it  suffered 
on  the  14th  of  February."  To  possible  locations  elsewhere  on  the  Trinity 
or  nearer  to  San  Antonio  he  was  even  less  favorable.  "Since  this  is  the 
place  formerly  considered  the  best,"  he  wrote,  "I  judge  that  such  other 
as  there  may  be  on  that  river  to  the  north  or  to  the  south  are  as  bad  if 
not  worse.  And  not  less  unsuitable  are  the  places  which  might  offer  some 
advantages  toward  the  west  between  the  Brazos,  San  Marcos,  and  Guada- 
lupe  rivers,  since  these  places,  because  of  their  large  encenadas,  are  the 
paths  of  ingress  and  egress  for  the  Comanches,  and  are  much  more  dan- 
gerous [than  the  others]  in  proportion  as  they  are  more  frequented  by 
these  Indians,  nearer  tneir  lands,  and  distant  from  the  friendly  tribes,  cir- 
cumstances which,  having  been  weighed  by  these  settlers,  led  them  to  flee 
to  this  vicinity."  His  opinion  of  Nacogdoches,  on  the  contrary  though 
based  mainly  on  hearsay,  as  he  frankly  admitted,  was  highly  favorable,  and 
he  intimated — what  Ybarbo  expressed — a  preference  for  it  over  Los  Ais. 
"Under  these  circumstances,"  he  continued,  "there  is  no  doubt  that  your 
Grace's  generous  piety  will  deign  to  approve  this  temporary  withdrawal, 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    133 

sion  to  remain  at  Nacogdoches,  he  was  making  recommendations 
to  Cabello  that  implied  an  expectation  that  his  request  would  not 
be  refused.  These  recommendations  were  of  a  kind  that  he  knew 
would  appeal  to  the  government,  since  they  concerned  the  control 
of  the  Indian  tribes  about  him.  In  May  he  reported1  that  the 
Tonkawa  Indians  who  had  been  promised  traders  and  had  been 
disappointed  were  becoming  insolent;  and  as  a  remedy  he  suggested 
that  a  trading  post  should  be  established  at  Nacogdoches  and  that 
a  comissary  should  be  stationed  there.  A  month  later  he  reported 
mew  difficulties  with  the  Indians,  and  said  that  Nacogdoches  should 
be  supplied  with  a  good  garrison.2 

Croix  and  Cabello  discussed  the  new  situation  without  any  refer- 
ence to  the  royal  order  in  response  to  which  the  Adaesans  had  been 
removed  from  the  frontier  further  than  to  indicate  that  they  were 
aware  that  it  was  not  being  complied  with.  They  both  showed 
plainly  that  they  desired  that  Ybarbo  be  allowed  to  remain  wherever 
he  would  be  most  useful  as  an  Indian  agent,  the  only  question 
being  what  was  the  most  desirable  location.  When  Croix  learned 

and,  if  it  be  your  superior  wish,  concede  them  permission  to  attempt  to 
establish  their  settlement  in  another  place — even  if  it  be  in  (hasta  la)  the 
old  mission  of  Los  Ais,  which  the  excellent  viceroy,  Dn.  Fr.  Antonio  Buca- 
reli  granted  them — where,  free  from  hostile  invasions,  they  may  in  some 
measure  retrieve  what  they  have  lost  in  all  these  removals.  .  .  .  And 
I  believe  that  the  advantages  which,  they  assure  me,  this  depopulated 
mission  of  Nacogdoches  possesses,  will  contribute  to  this  end.  Although 
the  site  for  the  settlement  is  not  the  best  nor  the  most  beautiful,  it  is  yet 
the  most  suitable,  judging  from  what  I  have  heard  and  the  little  which 
I  have  seen,  for  it  is  on  firm  land,  commanding,  entirely  free  from  in- 
undation, and  between  two  arroyos  abundantly  supplied  with  good  water. 
Besides  having  a  healthful  climate,  it  enjoys  the  advantage  of  having  near 
by  many  spacious  plains  of  proved  fertility,  some  more  and  others  less 
watered,  for  the  grain,  and  open  commons  (exidos) ,  good  pastures,  and 
numerous  springs  of  water,  for  raising  horses  and  cattle,  and  affords  all 
other  conveniences  that  these  people  could  wish  for  their  relief.  The  ad- 
vantage to  the  province  resulting  from  their  settlement  in  this  place 
would  not  be  slight,  through  their  being  able  to  visit  the  friendly  Indians 
frequently — having  them  near  by — and  to  promptly  report  everything  that 
they  may  attempt  anew  contrary  to  the  peace  promised  to  your  excel- 
lency." 

aln  his  letter  of  May  9,  cited  before. 

3Letter  to  Cabello  ,June  13,  1779,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono. 


134  Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

of  the  break-up  of  Bucareli  he  left  the  temporary  disposition  of 
the  inhabitants  to  Cabello,  giving  him  permission  to  bring  them 
back  to  the  Trinity  River,  or,  better,  as  he  thought,  to  establish 
them  in  any  one  of  the  places  to  the  northeast  that  had  been  sug- 
gested by  Botello.  Far  from  recommending  that  they  be  brought 
back  to  Bexar,  to  do  which  now  was  the  opportune  time  if  it  was 
to  be  done  at  all,  he  distinctly  said  that  such  a  procedure  "would 
be  prejudicial  to. the  plans  which  are  being  meditated,  by  interfer- 
ing with  the  cultivation  of  the  friendship  of  the  Texas  and  other 
allied  tribes."1  Cabello,  who  had  already  given  his  opinion  that 
Bucareli  could  not  be  held  against  the  Comanches  without  a 
garrison,2  soon  expressed  a  preference  for  Nacogdoches  over  any 
other  place,  approved  Ybarbo's  request  for  a  garrison  on  regular 
pay,  and  recommended  that  it  be  formed  of  the  settlers  already 
there.8 

While  Croix  and  Cabello  thus  favored  Nacogdoches,  Mezieres 
advocated  re-occupying  Bucareli.  We  have  already  seen  the  good 
opinion  entertained  by  him  of  the  site  of  Bucareli,  and  his  charge 
that  the  Comanche  attack  which  caused  its  desertion  had  been 
brought  on  by  the  foolish  fears  of  the  Spaniards.  Now,  in  August, 
1779,  he  visited  Nacogdoches  to  assist  the  settlers  during  the  ab- 
sence of  Ybarbo  in  pursuit  of  Comanches,  and  while  there  he  wrote 
to  Croix  a  gloomy  account  of  the  situation  of  the  inhabitants.  He 
criticised  their  location,  said  that  plenty  of  places  safe  from  flood 
could  be  found  near  Bucareli,  insisted,  as  before,  on  the  importance 
of  a  settlement  there  to  maintain  Indian  relations  and  with  a  view 
to  opening  up  trade  with  New  Orleans,  and  suggested  that  the 
people  be  sent  back  there  and  reinforced  by  a  regular  garrison  and 
Dy  the  Adaesans  who  had  remained  at  Bexar.1  But  Mezieres  died 

*Croix  to  Cabello,  May  21,  1779,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  12-13. 
2Cabello   to    Croix,    February    11,    1779,    in    Expediente    sobre   el    aban- 
dono, 12. 

t 

'Cabello  to  Croix,  May  31,  1779,  April  30,  1779,  and  August  31,  1779— 
all  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  13,  19,  31.  In  his  letter  of  May  31, 
In  his  letter  of  May  31,  Cabello  said  that  he  was  hardly  decided  as  to  the 
respective  merits  of  the  two  places,  but  by  the  time  of  his  next  letter  he 
had  no  doubts. 

*He  said  that  the  first  crop  sown  at  Nacogdoches  had  failed  and  that 
the  people  were  "scattered  among  the  Gentile  Indians,  carrying  what  they 


, 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    135 

soon  after  the  expression  of  this  opinion,1  and  the  only  effective 
opposition  to  the  occupation  of  Nacogdoches  was  removed. 

Only  to  Navarro,  in  Chihuahua,  did  it  occur  that  perhaps,  in 
order  to  fulfill  the  king's  command  made  seven  years  before, 
Ybarbo  and  his  people  should  be  brought  to  the  neighborhood  of 
Bexar.  But  even  to  him  this  was  but  a  passing  thought,  and  he 
recommended,  instead,  that  choice  be  made  between  Bucareli  and 
Nacogdoches,  and  that  the  decision  be  left  to  an  impartial  observer 
after  a  careful  examination  of  the  two  sites.2  Croix  appointed  as 
this  impartial  observer,  governor  Cabello,  whose  preference  was 
already  known.  But  Cabello  found  excuses  for  not  performing  the 
commission  himself  or  delegating  it  to  any  one  else,  while  Croix 
claimed  that  he  knew  of  no  one  outside  of  Texas  available  to  fill 
the  place.3  And  thus  the  matter  appears  to  have  dropped  by  a 
tacit  understanding,  and  the  pueblo  of  Nacogdoches  remained  un- 
disturbed. 

Not  only  did  Croix.  and  Cabello  refrain  from  breaking  up  the 
settlement,  but,  in  effect,  they  legalized  its  existence  by  assigning 
Ybarbo  a  salary  and  conferring  on  him  a  new  and  more  dignified 
title.  At  Bucareli  Ybarbo  and  his  men  had  served  without  pay  and 
had  furnished  their  own  arms  and  ammunition.  Ybarbo  claimed, 
besides,  that  making  presents  to  the  Indians  and  aiding  the  set- 
tlers had  cost  him  a  goodly  sum  from  his  own  private  means.  He 
asked,  therefore,  shortly  before  leaving  the  place,  that  arms  and 
ammunition  be  furnished  him  and  his  men,  and  that  they  be  paid 
for  time  spent  in  actual  service.  Ripperda,  and  after  him  his  suc- 
cessor, Governor  Cabello,  supported  his  request  before  Croix.  Fail- 
ing to  secure  his  demands,  Ybarbo  now  threatened  that  he  would 
leave  his  post.  The  effect  of  this  threat  discloses  the  real  attitude 
of  Cabello  and  Croix  toward  Ybarbo's  presence  on  the  frontier. 

possess,  offering  clothing  for  food,  bartering  hunger  for  nakedness"  (Ex- 
pediente  sobre  el  abandono  .  .  .  y  establecer  Comercio,  6-8). 

time  before  January  18,  1780  (Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  46). 


2Navarro  to  Croix,  January  17,  1780,  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono, 
46-48. 

•Croix  to  Cabello,  January  29,  1780;  Cabello  to  Croix,  April  1,  1780; 
Croix  to  Cabello,  January  19,  1780  —  all  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono, 
50-53. 


Texas  Historical  Association  Quarterly. 

Cabello  wrote  to  the  comandante  general  that  it  would  be  unwise 
to  let  Ybarbo  retire,  since  there  was  no  one  else  in  the  province  who 
could  wield  such  an  influence  among  the  Indians  and  do  so  much 
towards  keeping  them  quiet.  In  consequence  of  this  opinion,  Croix 
in  October,  1779,  assigned  Ybarbo  a  salary  of  five  hundred  pesos 
a  year.1  At  the  same  time  Cabello  conferred  on  him  the  title  of 
Lieutenant-Go vernor  of  the  Pueblo  of  Nacogdoches.2  That  he  was 
ever  formally  commissioned  to  this  office  I  cannot  say,  but  it  was 
as  such  that  he  was  thereafter  dealt  with  by  both  the  governor  and 
the  comandante  general.  It  is  plain,  therefore,  that  Ybarbo  was  no 
longer  remaining  on  the  frontier  by  mere  sufferance,  but  that,  on 
the  contrary,  he  was  kept  there  through  the  positive  desire  of  Ca- 
bello and  Croix  to  maintain  an  influence  over  the  Indians  of  the 
northeast. 

With  the  occupation  of  Nacogdoches  begins  a  new  and  important 
epoch  in  the  history  of  the  Spanish  regime  on  the  Texas-Louisiana 
frontier,  and  of  the  developments  there  Nacogdoches  instead  of 
Adaes  becomes  the  center.  The  trading  house  asked  for  by  Ybarbo 
was  established  and  the  Indian  trade  was  reorganized.  Nacog- 

1Ybarbo  to  Croix,  October  19,  1778;  Ripperda  to  Croix,  October  31, 
1778;  Croix  to  Cabello,  January  12,  1779;  Cabello  to  Croix,  April  3,  1779 
— all  in  Expediente  sobre  el  abandono,  16-18.  Croix  to  Cabello,  January 
16,  1779;  Cabello  to  Croix,  March  30,  1779;  Croix  to  Cabello,  October  15, 
1779;  and  Cabello  to  Croix,  December  17,  1779 — all  in  the  B6xar  Archives. 

2The  first  use  of  this  title  that  I  have  found  was  by  Cabello  in  a  letter 
to  Croix,  dated  December  17,  1779  (B6xar  Archives).  He  then  calls  him 
captain  of  militia  and  lieutenant  governor  of  the  pueblo  of  Nuestra 
Seflora  del  Pilar  de  Nacogdoches.  Cabello's  letter  notifying  Ybarbo  that 
he  had  been  assigned  a  salary  was  dated  March  11,  1780.  It  would  seem 
that  this  letter  was  considered  by  Ybarbo  as  the  source  of  his  authority 
and  the  title  to  his  pay,  for  in  after  years,  when  an  attempt  was  being 
made  to  remove  him,  he  furnished  a  copy  of  the  letter  as  evidence  of  his 
official  standing.  That  the  government  also  considered  this  letter  as  his 
commission  would  appear  from  the  fact  that  Governor  Pacheco  in  1788 
furnished  a  copy  of  it  as  evidence  of  one  of  the  offices  (empleos)  that  had 
been  created  in  Texas  between  1775  and  1787  (Pacheco  to  Ugalde,  May 
29,  1788,  in  the  Bexar  Archives). 

In  1797,  Ybarbo,  in  a  letter  asking  permission  to  resign  his  post,  styled 
himself  "Capitan  de  Milicias,  Teniente  de  Govr.  Militar  y  Politico,  Jues 
Delegado  de  Contravandos  y  de  Comisos,  y  Justizia  Mayor  del  Pueblo  de 
Nacogdoches  y  su  jurisdiocion"  (Letter  to  the  viceroy,  March  22,  1791,  in 
the  Be-xar  Archives). 


Spanish  Abandonment  and  Re-Occupation  of  East  Texas.    137 

doches,  through  being  made  the  headquarters  for  the  trade  and  the 
distribution  of  presents  among  the  dozen  or  more  tribes  in  whose 
midst  it  lay,  became  the  most  important  Indian  agency  in  the 
province,  while  Ybarbo,  as  head  of  the  community,  became  among 
the  Indians  of  the  northeast  the  most  influential  Spaniard  of  his 
day.  To  Nacogdoches  the  government  now  looked  for  the  main- 
tenance of  a  counter  influence  among  the  Indians  as  a  makeweight 
against  the  Anglo-Americans  who  made  their  way  to  the  borders  of 
the  country;  and  when,  in  1803,  the  American  frontier  was  car- 
ried clear  to  Texas,  Nacogdoches  became  equal  if  not  superior  in 
importance  to  Bexar  through  being  at  once  the  outpost  for  aggres- 
sive movements  by  the  Americans  and  for  resistance  by  the  Span- 
iards.1 

'It  should  be  noted  that  before  the  Louisiana  cession  in  1803  the  Tao- 
vayases  country  on  the  upper  Red  River,  as  well  as  the  northeast,  was 
looked  upon  as  a  point  of  special  danger  with  respect  to  the  Anglo-Ameri- 
cans. 


